Unity Of God's People -- (II.)
In an article preceding this one we have pointed out the two points of division that now exist within the church of our Lord. We have shown that those who promote the benevolent organizations as methods through which the church is to accomplish its work, and those who promote the "sponsoring church" system of cooperation through which many churches pool their resources in preaching the gospel contend that these arrangements are only methods to expedite the work of the church. Let me repeat: the real heart of the trouble today lies right here insofar as any point of teaching or doctrine is concerned. Remove these two points of contention, and our differences vanish.
Now seriously, let us ask the question, are these promotions worth the division that is occasioned by them? If we love the Lord and the cause of truth, we must say they are not.
We have mentioned that there is a "by-product" of other things growing out of these two points of difference. On the editorial page of the Gospel Advocate, some three years ago, appeared a suggestion that a movement be started to "quarantine" brethren who do not bow the knee in submission to the organizations and promotions that are in question. Since that time, we have learned of many efforts on the part of certain brethren to carry out this suggestion. Again on the front page of the Gospel Advocate, October 31, 1957, appeared an article entitled, "Some Things To Remember When Lines Are Drawn." There were a few good items in the article, with which no one could take issue. But we refer to this article as an example to show that brethren who promote the organizations are "drawing lines" against their brethren who do not agree with them.
Now, let me ask, in all the Book of God where do we find that God has ever given any man the right to draw a line against his brother? I know, of course, that God has drawn some lines, and that in obedience to God's law, we must recognize the lines that he has drawn. But my question is, where has God ever given any man the right to draw a line against a brother and to "quarantine" him in his preaching of the gospel? In the fifth chapter of First Corinthians the law is laid down against fellow-shipping a man who is guilty of immorality. God has drawn that line, and all who are faithful to him will recognize it. Also, in the third chapter of Second Thessalonians God has drawn a line against ungodliness and disorderly conduct; and in Romans, chapter sixteen, God has drawn a line against those who cause division by teaching things contrary to the doctrine of God as taught by Paul. God has drawn these lines and we must all recognize them and abide by them.
But where, oh, where? does God give any man the right to "draw a line" and try to "quarantine" a brother who preaches the gospel, and one who is not across the line that God has drawn? There has been a lot said about making laws where God has made none; and I submit that the man. or set of men, who will attempt to lay down laws and draw lines against others, are the very ones themselves who are making laws where God has not. and are drawing lines which God has not drawn. My brethren, let the lines remain where God has drawn them, and be content with that. Do we not know that this "line drawing" is a dangerous business, and unless it is stopped, it is certain to bring eternal damnation to those who are guilty of it.
To draw a line against a brother because he does not happen to agree with something that I myself claim is a matter of expediency is making a law where God has made none! Those who do this, and seek to "quarantine" their brethren are forcing their own opinions on the brotherhood; they are dividing the body of Christ. They shall have to answer to God in the day of judgment.
Again, let me ask, where does this "line drawing" come from? The apostles did not do it. Paul withstood Peter to his face, because he was to be condemned, but he made no effort to "quarantine" him and stop him from preaching the gospel. (Gal. 2:11.) Again, Paul contended with Barnabas, and the contention became so sharp that they separated one from the other in their fields of labor; but Paul certainly did not seek to "quarantine" Barnabas, and stop him from his preaching of the gospel. What, then, was Paul's attitude toward preaching the gospel? Read his attitude in Philippians 1:15-16, in which he tells that some preach Christ even of envy and strife, and some of love. How does he feel about this? "What then, notwithstanding every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached, and I therein do rejoice, and will rejoice." Paul could rejoice when the gospel was preached, even if the preaching of it did add afflictions to his bonds Then there is another "by-product" that has grown out of this difference between brethren. This is a bad attitude. Brethren are going to be lost eternally because of this had attitude. Jesus said in the sermon on the mount. "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them." Surely we have departed from this teaching. Brethren, if we will get back to the teachings of our Lord, as suggested here. I submit that our troubles will vanish away.
There is a lot of "name calling" going on among us that is all wrong. This is an evidence of the bad attitude. Actually, brethren have always had their differences, yet have recognized each other as brethren. The first time I became aware of present day differences was a time when I heard one brother anathematizing all who did not agree with him on the orphan homes and certain other points; he was calling them cranks, hobby-riders, Sommerites; etc. A man surely has a bad taste for his brethren when he will persist in calling them such names. There are some who continually refer to their brethren as "antic". "non-cooperation" brethren, etc. But surely all of us are "anti" sin, "anti" ungodliness, and "anti" worldly lusts: and all of us would refuse to "cooperate" with some schemes of doing missionary work, such as the missionary society.
Then, on the other side, there are those who have used the terms "digressive" and "institutional brethren." If we will leave off such terms, and improve our attitude toward one another we will go much farther toward solving our problems, Brethren, it is bad enough that we do not agree; but we can disagree and still love one another as brethren. But to disagree, and to hate one another also, that is of the devil.
My plea, then, is let us change our attitude toward each other, cease to use names and epithets of derogation. That is the golden rule; and he who is not willing to follow that rule surely does not want peace. Let all this "line-drawing" and "quarantining" be forgotten; Let us only recognize the lines that God has drawn. If we can do this, a new day will dawn among us. The day will be brighter, and life's burdens will grow lighter as we labor in this dismal land below. Then we can truly say:
"As the evening shadows lengthen,
And we face life's setting sun,
May our love still sweeter grow
Than when we first begun."