Toward Unity (No. 3)
By F. L. Lemley
[Page 88] |
One prominent editor has expressed the idea that "Agreement is not essential to childhood, but it is essential to unity." This is a strange statement in view of the fact that no two preachers agree upon every scriptural detail. Our traditional concept of unity is for everyone to "come to the Book, let it interpret itself, and everyone accept exactly what it says as authoritative." This requires that we all understand it exactly alike in every detail.
All truth is considered as equally related to our salvation and all error equally damnable, except that which we arbitrarily choose to tolerate. The only way to have unity with these misconceptions is to set up a Procrustean bed, like the fabled robber of old, and cut off everyone who is too long and stretch out everyone who is too short. This would achieve uniformity, but like Procrustes we would create a lot of cripples and generate a lot of hatred and prejudice. We can never achieve unity by our Procrustean methods.
Our fool-proof formula has become a cause of disunity, even to the extent that those who differ with the formula are ostracized from the brotherhood. No two factions have ever been united by applying the formula. It is unworkable among ourselves and cannot be of any use to divided Christendom.
The kind of unity for which we are urged to strive by the brethren was never had in any century, particularly in the first. Jesus did not pray for and the scriptures do not teach the kind of unity we have been preaching. We have misapplied Amos 3:3 and 1 Corinthians 1:10 along with many other scriptures and have made the interpretations of men the basis of unity. We must distinguish between the revelation of God and man's interpretation of that revelation.
We hear it said that the Bible needs no interpretation. This is fallacious, untrue and naive. One purpose of preaching is to interpret. Ezra not only read the scriptures but gave the sense (Nehemiah 8:8). All language, even the most simple, has to be interpreted. Most every word has more than one shade of meaning, and one has to select the meaning according to the context and human understanding.
It is frequently the case that two different people get altogether different concepts from a speaker after hearing identical words. Each receives the meaning of words according to his culture, his background, and his education. The Bible must be interpreted. Some man must give the sense. This does not mean that God cannot make himself understood, nor does it mean that one passage does not throw light upon another. It simply means that God has to use the medium of human languages to communicate. Certainly God can make himself understood and we need to use all of the help we can get from all Bible passages.
While in a meeting discussing the uniting of the followers of Campbell and Stone, during the first half of the last century. Elder John Smith said, "I have more cheerfully resolved on this course because the gospel is a system of facts, commands, and promises, and no inference or deduction from them, however logical or true, forms any part of the gospel of Jesus Christ. No heaven is promised to those who hold them, and no hell is threatened to those who deny them. They do not constitute, singly or together, any item of the ancient apostolic gospel."
Thomas Campbell expressed the same idea in different words in his "Declaration and Address," when he wrote, "That although inferences and deductions from Scripture premises, when fairly inferred, may truly be called the doctrine of God's holy word, yet they are not formally binding upon the consciences of Christians further than they perceive the connec-
[Page 89] |
These things being true, it is impossible to achieve a uniformity of interpretation of scripture. The word is God's, but the application, the interpretation, the inferences and deductions, are of man. This is not to say that we cannot reach agreement on any scripture, for we have on many. There are no brotherhood issues that do not invoke inferences and deductions of men. Men speaking for God, find it very easy to begin speaking as God. Eternal salvation does not depend upon the inferences and deductions of men!
We are not trying to establish that truth is relative. We are giving no support to existentialism. In our opinion truth is as static, as unchangeable, as immovable as God himself. But our knowledge of truth is relative. We do not know it all, we have never known it all, we shall never know it all, while in the flesh. As we learn we see the same truth in different settings, from different viewpoints, and in different relationships. The same truth looks different when viewed in variant relationships.
Two men may view a mountain range--one from a peak part way up, the other from a valley five miles distant. Both see the same range, but the man on the peak sees contours, valleys, lakes, etc., that the man in the valley does not see. It will do little good for them to debate their differences, for they are viewing from different perspectives. Let the man in the valley climb the peak and he will see things as the other does, or let the man on the peak descend into the valley and he will see as does the man in the valley, but he will never forget what he saw from the peak. So long as their relationships to the mountain are different, men may have disagreements, but the mountain does not change!
So it is with truth! Since none of us know it all, we are constantly learning more. As we learn we see old truths in new perspective. As individuals move from valley to peak, and as they climb higher, the mountain looks different. But it is the man who has moved or changed, not the mountain.
We are not arguing that it makes no difference what one believes so long as he is honest. All truth is to be preferred above any error. There are different values to be placed on truths, and one can be saved long before he discovers all truth. Some truths are vital to salvation, others are desirable but of lesser importance. For example, the age of Methuselah at death is not nearly so important as the truth that Christ died for our sins. One may never learn the age of Methuselah and still be saved, but it is vital to know that Christ died for us. We are all seekers for truth, but no one has yet arrived. While we may hold up the Bible and say, "Here is all the truth one needs to know," we must admit no one has fully mastered it. There are some truths easily understood while others are veiled in symbolic language!
We observe with displeasure some of the rationalizations of brethren who discredit those who attempt to study the question of unity. For example, some point with seeming glee to the Disciples of Christ as an example of what is going to happen to any who depart from the "old paths," meaning our old traditions. In other words, never question or restudy the subjects of unity or you are dead! All truth on this question has been set forth. All one can do is accept and repeat it! Others are quick to discredit the effort of anyone who is trying to achieve a closer unity among the denominations. The general idea seems to be that since it is useless for us to meet and discuss unity with the denominations, we need not, therefore, discuss it among ourselves. In fact, in many instances brethren are ostracized for even discussing the question.
Some of the "cock-sparrows" who discredit such efforts seem to think that, "If they would just invite me I would give
[Page 90] |
Reason would teach that we should start achieving and practicing unity, not with those farthest away, but with those closest by. We should not rationalize that since we have nothing in common with the World Council or modernists, we have nothing in common among ourselves. In the non-instrument segment alone there are at least two dozen factions. The body of Christ is not a denomination, but every faction is one.
All of our factions have in common the following which we see and understand with a great degree of uniformity: (1) Belief in God; (2) Belief in Christ as the Son of God; (3) The miracles, virgin birth, death, burial and resurrection; (4) The authority of the scriptures and their inspiration; (5) Congregational autonomy; (6) Church government, morals, and many other things. We who trumpet our solution for unity far and wide should demonstrate it among ourselves first, and then we should approach those using instrumental music and say, "Look! We have found the solution and united our ranks. Let us show you the way!"
This can never happen with prevailing misconceptions because it was our old solution that divided us. We had a difference and tried to come together and "find the truth" by debating it out. Instead of finding the truth we divided over and over. Our old solution is in error! Now those who say they have a solution should be taking the lead in instituting re-study of the question of unity, but all we have gotten so far from them is a lot of talk with no action except resistance, criticism and withdrawal! Will future historians write these off as twentieth century windbags who play a sort of "dog in the manger," that is, who cannot demonstrate the unity they preach and will not allow others to try?
We have demonstrated that God has made His word plain enough that we can agree on essentials. The fact that we are in agreement on many essentials is proof. With the things specified, a minimum of human reason and interpretation are involved. We should be able to deduct with a minimum of effort what is essential to childhood as differentiated from that which is no part of the seed that produces children. Surely we can distinguish between the seed which produces the children and the food which sustains their life after it is produced. If we cannot do this we ought to quit pretending to preach until we can!
Having determined the essentials we should further see that the unity for which Christ prayed is not an organic unity requiring uniformity in every detail. It is a unity of the Spirit which allows for diversity among the children. Having accepted these truths, our problem is about solved. The truth on no brotherhood issue over which we have divided is essential to childhood. But the consciences of many become involved in these issues. Minor differences become major issues to one whose conscience is set. We must agree to allow each to satisfy his own conscience on these issues without ostracizing or incriminating him.
This is a two way street! Many have a conscience that will reject all of this reasoning and study. Romans 14 is the answer! Having accepted this we allow our Pauls and Barnabases to separate and go into different fields without "un-brothering" them. Thus will we recognize the unity for which Jesus prayed! Our unity is to be found in Christ, the Man, and not in a uniform interpretation of some vague passage of the Book, the Bible!
We are brothers because we have the same Father, not because we understand the book of Revelation alike, or agree upon cups, classes, cooperation, or instrumental music. Agreement upon these things among the children is not essential to the unity for which Christ prayed. The differences between factions today is
[Page 91] |