“DOCTRINE DIVIDES, SERVICE UNITES”

Every worthwhile endeavor, whether political, social or religious, eventually cultivates its cliches. Our own unity efforts, as well as the ecumenical movement at large, is no exception. This is to be expected, for cliches are depositories of at least some truth, and they serve to say much in few words. The problem is that they are often overstatements or oversimplifications, and may therefore be misleading.

This is the case with “Doctrine divides, service unites,” which is increasingly urged upon us as a principle of unity. It asserts that Christians who have long been hopelessly divided over doctrine can find oneness by joining hands in service to suffering humanity. Unquestionably there is important truth here, and it is often demonstrated in emergency situations, where folk have no time to consider doctrinal differences, so busy are they in mutual service. Yet even here it is proper to ask if this is the essence of Christian unity.

So we are challenging the value of the statement, suggesting that it may be misleading. It not only leaves the wrong impression in reference to the relationship between doctrine and unity by implying that doctrine is unimportant, but it misses the point of what really divides and unites us.

There is nothing divisive per se about doctrine, unless indeed the reference is to the doctrines of men, which often support sectarianism. But even here no man’s interpretation of scripture, which is all a doctrine of man is, is in itself divisive. It is the behavioral problem that goes along with it that is factious. That is, when a man is bent upon forming a clique or party around his hobby. This is the Lord’s complaint in Mt. 15:9 (“Their worship of me is in vain, for they teach as doctrines the commandments of men”) where man is making his own opinion the commandment of God.

The truth about doctrine is that it strengthens the bond of union between disciples. It is in doctrine that we are nourished of God and led by his Spirit. As I Pet. 2:2 has it: “As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that you may grow thereby.” The milk of the word certainly does not divide us. It is rather the bad attitude of a factious spirit that separates us into warring parties.

There is no place in scripture where doctrine (teaching) is in itself the cause of division; that is, where ideas are sincerely set forth as an honest effort to understand God’s will. Divisions come only when men press their opinions to the place of either having their way or tearing things up, which is what we mean by a behavioral problem. This is why we contend that the line of fellowship cannot be drawn on a brother only because he is mistaken, sincerely mistaken, in his teaching of the Bible. On the other hand a brother may make fellowship impossible by his irresponsible, sectarian behavior even when he is doctrinally right.

This is evident in the case of Hymenaeus and Philetus in II Tim. 2, who are often referred to as heretical because of what they taught. That they were wrong, and seriously wrong, about their idea of the resurrection, is evident enough, for the record says: “They have shot wide of the truth in saying that our resurrection has already taken place.” But this is not a case of folk who mean well but are only mistaken in their efforts to understand. It is primarily a problem of attitude and behavior. Verse 16 refers to their “empty and worldly chatter,” and in I Tim. 1:20, where Hymenaeus is referred to again, it is clear that it is a case of bad conscience. Men do not make “shipwreck of their faith” simply by being sincerely mistaken, but by “spurning conscience.” Such were Hymenaeus and Philetus. The record says they blasphemed. They deceitfully endeavored to lead disciples astray by their empty talk that spread like gangrene. While their doctrine of the resurrection, which was really a denial of the gospel, was as erroneous as it could be, the real problem lay in the kind of men they were, their character, attitude and behavior. Never would the apostle have “consigned to Satan” a sincere truth-seeker, however mistaken he may have been, as he did Hymenaeus.

This case makes it clear what divides men --- a lack of love, with all that that means: envy, strife, pride, insincerity. So long as a man loves his brothers and remains teachable, he is not going to be factious, even when his mistaken views are rather serious. This is why forbearance is listed among the virtues: there would be little need for such a grace if it were not that some of us are going to be wrong along the way. But when a brother becomes intractable, and is so set in his way (whether right or wrong doctrinally) that he’ll rule or ruin, the grace of forbearance is in vain. This calls for stronger measures, such as consigning one to Satan, as Paul did to Hymenaeus.

Surely we can see that a brother who believes that liberty in Christ allows him to use instrumental music or one who interprets prophecy in a way to allow for a premillennial reign of Jesus is not to be put in the same class with Hymenaeus and Philetus. It is of course possible for one to behave himself in such a way about these things as to make himself a problem, but when that is the case it is his behavior and attitude and not his view-point that makes him like Hymenaeus. One can be an Hymenaeus and be anti-organ or anti-premillennial as well.

So the sweeping generalization that “Doctrine divides” or even tends to divide will not hold up. To the contrary it is the teaching (didache) of the apostles that enriches and strengthens the bond of union which we have in Christ. Take this instruction for instance: “Be generous to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another as God in Christ forgave you” (Eph. 4:32). Or this one: “Put on the garments that suit God’s chosen people, his own, his beloved: compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, patience. Be forbearing with one another, and forgiving, where any of you has cause for complaint: you must forgive as the Lord forgave you” (Col. 3:12-13). Here is instruction on how to take care of difficult people and how to handle delicate problems. How vital to the preservation of unity!

It is probable that when folk say that “Doctrine divides” they are referring to all those speculations about scripture that often engross our brothers. Many have hobbies that are easy to ride. Others get lopsided in their concerns, making too much of what may well be appropriate in moderation. Some can talk or write only about the war question, divorce and remarriage, or the order of worship. Even these things do not divide within themselves, and it is in such areas where the rest of us are to extend forbearance and love, showing warmth also toward those who have some hangup on a private interpretation. So long as he too remains loving and tractable, not allowing himself to demand that others accept his viewpoint, unity will be preserved.

As for the other end of the slogan, “Service unites,” we can only conclude that it too is partly right and partly wrong. The basis of unity is not service. Many a folk work side by side all week or all year, and do a good job together, who have no common bond whatever, except that they are employed by the same company. Many a congregation has an impressive service record, wherein many brothers are at work together, that is not necessarily united in heart and mind. Yet it is true that people who have difficulty find that their differences melt into insignificance when they get involved in doing something for Jesus together. Service, like doctrine, while it is not the ground of fellowship, deepens and strengthens it. Nearly always there is more peace and happiness in a congregation that is busy doing something for suffering humanity, which must be distinguished from doing something for itself.

The basis of unity and fellowship is Jesus. It is the magnetic power of his love that makes us one. Like the filings adhering to the magnet, the closer we are to him the more secure is our position. In playing with a magnet and nails, one notices that the nails that hang to other nails tend to slip loose and fall, while those next to the magnet are sure and steadfast. Too often we depend on some leader or group or congregation, which is risky, however close they may be to Jesus. Our closeness to each other should be because we are together drawn to him, not because we are drawn to each other. “If I be lifted up,” he promised, “I will draw all men to myself.” That is where we want to be, for he is the anchor of our soul and the firm foundation of our life. In Jesus service becomes meaningful and doctrine becomes enriching. --- the Editor