HOW TO OVERCOME OUR BIGGEST HANGUP

It amazes me that people can have so much in common in theory and yet be so divided in practice. An instance of this is that great principle that comes down to us out of our history expressed in that slogan In matters of faith, unity; in matters of opinion, liberty; in all things, love. I have not met the brother yet who does not accept this principle: that unity can be based only on matters of faith and that opinions must be held as private property and not be made tests of fellowship. When it comes to putting this into practice we are confronted with what I consider to be our biggest hangup: what I believe to be a matter of faith is viewed by others as a matter of opinion, and what they accept as a matter of faith I relegate to a matter of opinion.

The slogan is not original to our own Movement. It goes back to around 1615, to one Rupert Meldenius, who was defending Lutheranism in the early days of the Reformation, who is quoted as saying in Latin something like this: “If we would but observe unity in essentials, liberty in non-essentials, charity in both (or all things), our affairs would certainly be in the best possible situation.” This was later popularized by Richard Baxter, who urged that all believers follow the dictum: “In fundamentals, unity, in nonfundamentals (or doubtful things) liberty; in all things, charity.”

Our forebears in the Restoration Movement, sickened as they were with opinion as the grounds for acceptance into a sect, made this slogan one of the basic principles of their plea. Unity can be realized on the grounds of the faith as revealed by the apostles, not upon the suppositions, deductions and opinions of men. Opinions in themselves are all right and even necessary, if men are to study freely, but they have no right to impose any position upon their brothers except what is clearly set forth in the scriptures, was their position.

Alexander Campbell put it this way in The Christian System, p. 90: “Let the Bible be substituted for all human creeds; facts for definitions; things, for words; faith for speculation; unity of faith for unity of opinion; the positive commandments of God for human legislation and tradition; piety for ceremony; morality for partisan zeal; the practice of religion for the mere profession of it, and the work is done.”

Campbell saw opinions as the basis of creeds, and creeds as the basis of fellowship. He insisted that every creed in the history of Christianity had created a sect. It is ironic that we, heirs of the very Movement he helped to initiate, a Movement “to unite the Christians in all the sects” by replacing faith for opinion as the basis of oneness, should be divided into various parties through the same kind of opinionism and creed-making, Campbell’s battle cry, “Human creeds, as bonds of union and communion, are necessarily heretical and schismatical,” applies to us as much as to anybody else.

In matters of faith, unity; in matters of opinion, liberty; in all things, love. This is accepted by all our divergent groups, and, I dare say, by the Christian world at large, and yet we remain tragically divided. We have the answer to division in theory. It is all wrapped up in that slogan. Our hangup is that we can’t move from theory to practice. And this is because we are all fouled up on the meaning of faith and opinion. When someone opposes what we want to practice, we say he is making an opinion a test of fellowship; but when he practices something that we oppose, we say he is violating a matter of faith. It is like one man’s definition of orthodoxy and heterodoxy. “Heterodoxy is his doxy and orthodoxy is my doxy,” he said.

If we think in terms of putting all our conclusions (and practices) into one of two baskets, one marked “matters of faith” and the other “matters of opinion,” it will help us see our dilemma. What goes into the “faith” basket is absolutely essential to the Christian religion, while the second basket will receive what we desire or prefer, but they are not of the very essence of our faith. Or to put it another way: what goes into the “faith” basket will be the grounds upon which we accept a man as our brother in Christ; what goes into the “opinion” basket may have some value, more or less, in living the Christian life, but they cannot be made tests of fellowship.

It may also help if we think of these baskets sitting on the Lord’s table. Our brethren from all these persuasions are gathered, and each of us is to walk to the table and place his ideas and practices into one of the baskets. Whatever we drop into the “faith” basket will be that which we will require of all the others if they are to be our brothers. What we drop into the “opinion” basket may lay claim to something that we would like for the others to consider, but not something that we would impose on the others as the basis for unity.

We are a diverse group, all of us who are sitting there before the two baskets, but we have one important thing in common. We all look to Jesus as the Lord of our lives and we come from 15 or 20 different parties within the Restoration Movement. We have divided about every decade over the past century over all sorts of things, but now we have gathered to give special testimony as to how significant these differences really are. Here are some of the things that have divided us.

Sunday Schools or Bible classes

Missionary and benevolent societies

Serving the Supper

a. Cups vs. one cup

b. Grape juice vs. wine

Minister system

Charismatic gifts

Premillennialism

“Liberalism”

Instrumental music

Literature instead of or in addition to the Bible

Bible colleges

Order of worship (as stated in Acts 2:42)

Centralized agencies (such as Herald of Truth)

Reimmersion of immersed believers

Open membership

In fundamentals, unity. Are these the fundamentals, the essences of our religion? Are we to say, unless you agree with me on these things and practice what I do, you cannot be my brother and be within the fellowship? If we dare to put these things in the basket of “faith,” we are insisting that our position in regards to them is necessary in order to go to heaven.

Here is another list for us to consider:

One body

One Spirit

One hope

One Lord

One faith

One baptism

One God

There is substantial difference between the two lists, for one comes right from the Bible, the other doesn’t. Paul lists these seven ones in reference to “preserving the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” They are surely the fundamentals of our faith, for without them fellowship and salvation have no meaning.

We can all with good conscience put these items into the basket of “faith,” insisting that if a man does not subscribe to these he is not a Christian. These are all necessary to unity and fellowship. Paul can hardly be criticized for “fellowshipping anybody and everybody,” for he bases fellowship upon believing (one faith) in Jesus as the one Lord and yielding to the one baptism, which puts a man into the one Body, by which he receives the one Spirit, shares the one hope, looking to the one God.

We all agree that these go into the basket of “matters of faith,” but how about societies, organs, and classes? Come now, do you really believe these are in the same class?

Our forebears were well aware of this problem of faith and opinion, and they believed that they came up with an answer. Thomas Campbell put it this way: “In order to be united, nothing ought to be inculcated upon Christians as articles of faith, nor required of them as terms of communion, but what is expressly taught and enjoined upon them in the word of God.”

Why can we not shake ourselves free of this hangup and accept what Campbell is saying? Is instrumental music or acappella music expressly taught in the scriptures? Can we take something that the Bible is silent about and put it into the basket of “faith,” thereby declaring it to be essential to salvation? Is a pro or con position on Herald of Truth in the same category with the seven unities Paul lists in Eph. 4? Is it not really a matter of opinion rather than something expressly taught in the Bible?

Opinions and deductions certainly have their place, so we have a basket for them. They are important for study and growth, and they are useful for challenging each other’s thinking. We are only saying, as was Campbell, that they do not belong in “matters of faith.” Hear Thomas Campbell again: “Although inferences and deductions from Scripture premises, when fairly inferred, may be truly called the doctrine of God’s holy word, yet they are not formally binding upon the consciences of Christians farther than they perceive the connection, and evidently see that they are so; for their faith must stand not in the wisdom of men, but in the power and veracity of God. Therefore, no such deductions can be made terms of communion, but do properly belong to the after and progressive edification of the Church. Hence, it is evident that no such deductions or inferential truths ought to have any place in the Church’s confession.” (Declaration and Address, p. 46)

He grants that an opinion or deduction may well be true and thus “the doctrine of God’s holy word,” but since it is not clearly and distinctly set forth as such, it is not immediately evident to all. It cannot, therefore, be binding upon anyone until he himself sees the connection, which, of course, he may never do. Still he is to be received as a brother, for no such deductions are to be made terms of communion.

True, some of us are going to say that the instrument or the Sunday School or a plurality of cups is to us a matter of faith. This can only mean that our deductions, drawn from what little the Bible does say or doesn’t say, leads us to see it a certain way, and to do otherwise would violate our conscience. No one can criticize us for this, for this is what we should do: follow our consciences in view of what we understand the Bible to teach. But still we must grant that this is our own interpretation, and we cannot impose our view upon our brothers, except as they too come to see it as we do. In the meantime we receive them even as Christ received us, to the glory of God (Ro. 15:7).

So this is a lesson in basket weaving. We can overcome a crippling hangup if we will take some of our thinking out of one basket, the one marked “matters of faith,” and put them into the other basket marked “matters of opinion.” Then we weave a basket large enough for the other baskets, marked “love,” and we put everything into it! —the Editor