Fellowship and Endorsement

By Harold Key

     The subject for consideration at this time is "Fellowship and Endorsement." And I might as well start out by stating that my participation in this meeting is not intended to imply that I am in agreement with all the ideas that may be held by the brethren who are participating with me in this forum. I have had private discussions with most of them, and I think I know enough about all of them to know that there are areas of thought and practice in which we most certainly disagree.

     I make this preliminary statement for two reasons. The first reason I have for saying this is so that everyone present or who may later read this in print will at least know that I do not endorse the ideas and practices of my brethren in those areas wherein we differ. My second reason for trying to be quite emphatic in clarifying my position is in order to actually illustrate the point of my whole thesis in this lectureship, which is: Fellowship does not necessarily constitute endorsement. This very occasion confirms the fact that joint-participation may and does occur even though there are differences and disagreements between the participants.

     Let us leave the subject of Christian fellowship for a moment and simply consider the nature of fellowship itself. Webster's Unabridged Dictionary defines fellowship as: "1. State or relation of being a fellow or associate; a body of fellows. 2. A state of being together; community of interest, activity, feeling, etc. 'Fellowship in pain.' Milton. 3. Companionship of persons on equal and friendly terms; familiar intercourse; hence, friendliness; comradeship. 4. Any union or association; corporation; company; esp., a company of equals or friends. 5. Partnership; alliance; membership (in a society); intercourse." The origin of the word seems to go back to the practice of going to sea together for a mutual advantage. They were fellows in the ship, and thus the relation among them came to be termed "fellowship." They may have had very serious disagreements while at sea, but their disagreements were within the fellowship. It was their agreement in one thing which created the fellowship, not their agreement in everything. It may have been impossible at times to have had unanimity of thinking, and it may have been difficult at times to even bear with one another. But my point is, it was possible for fellowship to exist without the endorsement of everything about the fellows in the ship.

     This is still true. In the area of international political fellowship, for instance, this is easily seen. In the United Nations organization there are now one hundred

[Page 34]

eleven nations who are members. This is a fellowship or community of nations. But surely no one supposes that because the United States and Soviet Russia are both in the family of Nations this means we endorse their system of communism, or that we uphold their enslavement of satellite countries, or that we approve the scheming and deception of their officials. Yet our country has been in the fellowship of the United Nations along with the U.S.S.R. So, at least, fellowship there is in no wise equivalent to endorsement of the ideas and practices of one another. On the contrary, this fellowship was created in order to bring the differing nations into a harmony which would have been otherwise impossible.

     And I suggest that this is precisely the same principle which prevails in the community of Christ, the family of God. God calls us to share in the fellowship of His only begotten Son in order to bring us into harmony with Himself and with one another which would be otherwise impossible. We are called into this fellowship in order to achieve harmony and not because harmony has already been achieved. In other words, we are in the fellowship in order to perfection and not because we are perfect.

     However, many good people erroneously suppose that Christian fellowship is based upon unanimity of correct beliefs, opinions and practices by all who are in the fellowship. Such persons feel that this is the explicit teaching of God's word. They are positive that when any disagreement exists over any matter of faith and/or practice, the other person is in error and thereby severed from God and the fellowship in Christ. Therefore, to them, to claim fellowship with another is equivalent to giving full approval to and endorsement of all of the beliefs and practices of that person. This is why they feel so strongly that they must disavow fellowship when they disagree.

     But this is not the teaching of sacred scripture. Rather, it is exactly contrary to what is true. In 1 John 1:3 it is stated that we are in fellowship with the Father and the Son: "That which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you may have fellowship with us; and our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ." Since we are in fellowship with the Father, does this mean that He endorses our weaknesses, our lack of knowledge, our imperfections? Or does it mean that no one is in His fellowship who is not mature, who is not perfect? It means either something very, very disheartening, even hopeless, or something very, very wonderful and exceedingly encouraging.

     Fellowship (Greek: Koinonia) is the state or relation with God into which we are called by the gospel of His Son Jesus Christ. It is not dependent upon our perfection of knowledge or understanding of the scriptures, but rather our simple belief that Jesus Christ His Son died for our sins, and on the basis of that faith being baptized in the name of Christ. Every penitent, baptized believer in Christ on earth is in the koinonia of Christ, and he is a brother to all other such believers. We are all brothers because we have the same Father, and we sustain each one exactly the same relation to Christ. Endorsement of one another's opinions, or ideas, or interpretations, or practices has nothing to do with whether or not one is in the family of God.

     I am the youngest son of C. J. Key. His oldest son, Roy, who is also taking part in this forum, was five years old when I was born. My parents say he was a rather possessive little youngster. For instance, they said he would cry for such items as the moon and feel very resentful because they would not get it for him. It certainly would not have been strange, then, if he had resented the coming of a little brother. Whether he did or not I don't know. But I was in the family regardless. I do know that I was rather hostile toward my sister who was born when I was five years old. I quite vividly remember when I first saw her and the exact words which I said: "Don't he look mean!" But she was in the family just as much as I was, regardless of my disapproval of her looks. And because we had the same parents, we were in the same fellowship even if I didn't like

[Page 35]

it. My parents received and kept all of us in spite of our lack of endorsement of one another and some heated expressions at times to that effect. Through their constant love and forbearance with us, we eventually caught the family spirit, and as we matured we responded with love and forbearance for one another.

     All of us know how the fleshly koinonia can and does exist without endorsing every act or attitude of the other. Why then should it be strange that the spiritual koinonia can and does exist without endorsement or agreement on all points? Which congregation anywhere on earth is composed of members who are one hundred per cent correct in knowledge, in faith, in zeal, in love, in purity? When they eat the Lord's Supper together, does this establish a blanket approval of everything about every one who eats? When they sing together, pray together, work together, is it to be said this constitutes an endorsement on the part of each toward all in every way?

     Just as it was in the days of the apostle John, so it is now that within the fellowship of Christ there are "little children," "young men," and "fathers." There are those who are just beginning, those who are growing, and those who are mature in the faith. This is reason for scriptural admonition to brotherly patience and forbearance with the weak. This is the need for admonition to the immature to "grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." To equate fellowship with endorsement is to attempt to force Christians in the various ranges of development immediately to the same level, which obviously is one's own level. Every person would have to exalt his own concepts and knowledge to the status of infallibility, becoming himself the standard of measurement for everyone else. Consequently, if he did happen to grow in grace or in knowledge, he would be in a predicament. He would then have to disavow fellowship with all those who previously were in fellowship with him and who did not grow exactly as he did. But how can he know that be does not need to still grow some more? And if he does need to grow, that means he is not yet acceptable and therefore fellowship cannot be extended to him. Thus, brotherhood would be simply a continual disavowing of fellowship on the part of each brother toward every other.

     In the early church fellowship did not necessarily mean endorsement at all. Paul writes in the second chapter of Galatians about a serious disagreement which he had at Antioch with Peter and Barnabas. But in the previous paragraph he describes the extending of the right hand of fellowship all around. Obviously, fellowship did not make Paul endorse their mistakes. In writing to the church at Corinth which had many erroneous beliefs and practices, and was perhaps the most imperfect church mentioned in all the scriptures, Paul constantly called them all brethren and never even so much as slightly suggested that they were not in the Koinonia. His very correspondence with them was because they were in the fellowship. "To the church of God which is at Corinth," is the way he begins. Not, "to the so-called church of God which is at Corinth," because they really were the church. "To those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours." They were the church of God, they were saints together with the saints in any other place in spite of their faults which Paul was about to mention. But before he brings up their faults, he writes in verse nine, "God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord." You were called into the fellowship, the koinonia, of Jesus Christ! After reminding them of the fact they were in the fellowship, Paul begins in the very next verse to appeal to them "by the name of our Lord Jesus" to stop their dissensions. The reason they should exercise a brotherly regard for one another and strive to be of one mind and to speak the same thing is because they were all in the same fellowship of Christ. "Is Christ divided?" No, of course not. Then honor the unity which you have with one another in Him!

[Page 36]

     In spite of doctrinal errors and unwarranted practices among them which Paul could not approve, he never advised those who agreed with himself to divide themselves from the others in the church of God at Corinth. And, for that matter, not once in all the inspired record was any church advised to split, separate, or "withdraw" from any other church. It is a travesty on the koinonia to have division in the first place. Therefore, it was unthinkable to consider dividing the church in order to make it sound and whole.

     But how does one deal with brethren when some of their beliefs and practices cannot be endorsed? We must do as did the apostle Paul. He did not disavow fellowship, but he did say, "In this I praise you," and, "In this I praise you not." We also must be given the liberty to say to such brethren today, "In this I praise you," and, "In this I praise you not." "This among you I endorse. But this among you I endorse not." To a degree this is what we constantly do with certain hymns, commentaries, dictionaries and encyclopedias. Because we use these which are acceptable, it does not mean that we endorse everything which the authors wrote. In fact, even with such a book as we accept there may be some statements made with which we disagree. Think of the most acceptable preacher whom you know, one with whom you are in "full" fellowship. Do you agree with every statement which he makes and with every act which he does? Would you be willing to go on record as declaring that whatever he says or does you will back up as having your full approval and endorsement? We know that neither we nor anyone else is entitled to blanket endorsement in every thing, and yet fellowship can exist without such infallibility.

     But in spite of this obvious truth someone says, "Does not the scripture declare that two cannot walk together unless they are agreed? So does this not teach that unanimity in agreement is essential to fellowship?" This is a reference to Amos 3:3 which reads, "How can two walk together unless they are agreed?" The obvious inference is they have agreed on something. But agreed upon what? Certainly for two people to walk along a roadway together, they do not have to agree upon everything in the mind of one another. What they are agreed upon is that they want to walk together! This agreement does not mean that they must be of the same opinion as to the chemical analysis of the material out of which the road is constructed; or of the same opinion concerning the type and depth of the foundation, of one accord as to all who were involved in its building and in its maintenance; nor must they be in agreement as to how many people may have traveled it before or may be traveling it now. They do not even have to agree as to how long the road may be and of the conditions of the country ahead. What this passage in Amos says is that when people walk along together it is because they want to walk together. They simply have made an appointment, an agreement, to walk together. To attempt to use this or any other scripture to justify division is to trample underfoot all of the multiplied scriptures which plainly and repeatedly describe division within the koinonia as sinful, and it is to wrest the scriptures to the very opposite purpose for which they were intended, "which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures" (2 Peter 3:16).

     If secular friendship can involve fellowship without endorsement on all points, if physical kinship can involve fellowship without endorsement on all points, if God's relation toward man can involve fellowship without His endorsement of us

[Page 37]

on all points, then why should fellow Christians be under the illusion that if they cannot endorse everything about one another they can have no fellowship? Such teaching is of the father of lies and not of the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, His Father and our Father.

     The truth is that it is absolutely impossible to have fellowship of any sort with human beings on the basis of endorsing everything about one another. There is no person on earth who agrees in everything with anyone else. And yet in spite of this fact, we all have known some very close and very satisfying relationships with other human beings. The stronger the love for one another, the easier it is to transcend differences. The closer we approach the heart of Christ, the more we are able to love and hold to the person without embracing his imperfections. It was here that the Pharisees never could make such a distinction between fellowship and endorsement. The most completely damning thing they thought they could say about Jesus was, "This man receives sinners!" But is not this precisely the ground of our hope, the sweet encouragement of us who are sinful? And who is not sinful? When Jesus invites, "Come unto me all ye that--," we do not for one moment think He actually means, "Come to Me all ye who know the truth as fully as I know it, who are as upright in life as I am, and who are as completely and as perfectly faithful to the Father's will as I am." How hopeless and entirely forbidding that would be. No, thank God, the Great Invitation says, "Come unto Me all ye that labor and are heavy laden."

          Come, ye sinners, poor and needy,
               Weak and wounded, sick and sore; 
          Jesus ready stands to save you,
               Full of pity, love and power.

          Let no sense of sin prevent you, 
               Nor of fitness fondly dream;
          All the fitness He requireth
               Is to feel your need of Him.

     Granted then that Christ receives the unworthy, our problem under consideration is: On what basis are we to receive one another? The scriptures declare, "Receive ye one another as Christ also received you" (Romans 15:7). Will you say that again, Paul? "Receive ye one another as Christ also received you!" The example for the disciples of Christ to follow safely and confidently in everything is the Master Himself. In His steps one simply cannot stray. The Holy Spirit knew this and reminds us in 1 Peter 2:21 that Christ has left you "an example that you should follow in His steps." Here is the blessed truth and wisdom and power of God incarnated in our own human flesh for us both to see and to lay hold on. Whenever we begin to argue about the doctrine of Christ, it is so simple and so refreshing to turn back and see how He exemplified such truth or such obedience in His own life. It is so easy to become confused about precepts if we forget the one infallible example. This is most assuredly one reason why the truth of God simply had to become incarnate in a human being, who while being fully God was also fully man. This is why the apostle Paul in trying to get the Corinthians to lay hold on the power which could overcome their divisions, purify their practices and straighten out their mistaken concepts, reminded them, I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified" (1 Corinthians 2:2).

     Let us also even in this day, do as did the apostolic writers and restore emphasis upon the centrality of Jesus Christ in Christianity, that our faith may actually rest in Him as the full and perfect revelation of God's truth, God's complete and final word to man. "And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth, and we beheld His glory" (John 1:14).

               I'd rather see a sermon,
                    Than hear one any day;
               I'd rather one would walk with me,
                    Than merely tell the way.
               The eye's a better pupil,

[Page 38]

                    And more willing than the ear;
               Fine counsel is confusing,
                    But example's always clear.