The Word Abused . . .

POTPOURRI OF ABUSED TERMS

This is not to be an extended treatment of anyone term, but a kind of miscellany of scriptural concepts that have been wrenched from their context and twisted in such a way as to be given special title to some sect or party. For the most part these are scriptural concepts, but they become unsound and unwholesome through the use made of them. Though our treatment will necessarily be brief, we hope it will be sufficient to stir up your sincere minds and to make you more conscious of the importance of a pure speech.

“Member of the Church”

True, the scriptures do use the term member in such passages as 1 Cor. 12:14: “The body does not consist of one member but of many,” and it may be that we can properly use the term “church member.” But our use is likely foreign to what the apostle meant. Member in our culture is almost always institutionalized. One is a member of the school board, the Elks Club, or the NAACP. In much the same way he is a member of the Methodist Church or the Church of Christ. We are more comfortable in identifying someone as a member of the church than as a Christian. Being a church member has no necessary connection to one’s commitment to Jesus Christ as Lord.

The Greek term for member (melos) occurs 30-odd times in the NT, and it is clear enough in such references as “For we are members one of another” (Eph. 4:25). But still the use of member in our culture is against us. This is why Phillips does better with “For we are not separate units but intimately related to one another in Christ.” The word melos simply means a part or a member of the whole, such as in the body of man or animal.

If we used the word less and “church member” none at all, we would move closer to a pure scriptural vocabulary. Part would be much better. Our brothers and sisters are parts of one another in our relation to Jesus. Member smacks of the Oddfellows or the PT A. I don’t even think of my arm or leg as members of my body, but as parts. Looking at it this way makes 1 Cor. 12:25-26 really come alive: “But God has combined the various parts of the body, giving special honor to the humblest parts, so that there might be no sense of division in the body, but that all its organs might feel the same concern for one another. If one organ suffers, they all suffer together.”

If we are brothers together, then we are “parts of Christ” together, and that is all that should matter. Being a “member of a congregation” is a different idea. It is not that which makes us a part of Christ. Perhaps we should all be recognized as “parts of the Body” at a given congregation, so that God’s under-shepherds can watch for our souls, but “church membership” and being a part of Christ have become so foreign to each other that it is well to take a closer look at all of it.

“The Lord’s People”

I am not sure that this exact expression is in the scriptures, but it could certainly be defended as a biblical concept. God’s children are surely His people, the Lord’s people. But to be used properly it must include all those that are in His family. The party in which I grew up has used this term in a sectarian sense, making it apply only to themselves. “The Lord’s people” in Denton, Texas would be only those who are members (there it is again!) of the Church of Christ. But all sects are guilty of this, for only they, as they see it, are the Lord’s people. Many of the Lord’s people have never heard of the Restoration Movement or what we call “Church of Christ” or “Christian Church” (exclusive titles on our part), nor is it necessary that they ever hear of such in order to be His people. It is Jesus and the gospel that they are to hear, and all those who believe and respond to the good news make up the Lord’s people. To use the term in such a way as to leave out even one such person is to use the language of a sectarian.

“Sanctuary”

More and more our folk are being subjected to this kind of Ashdod, as if we supposed that there really are holy places and things in the Christian faith. Again we are dealing with a scriptural concept. Eph. 2:19f. speaks of “the household of God” as being a holy temple in the Lord. That is a sanctuary. And 1 Cor. 6:19: “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you.” That too is a sanctuary. This means that there is only one sanctuary of God on this earth, and that is the human heart in which God dwells.

To refer to a room in a meetinghouse as “the sanctuary” is silly, regardless of its costly pews and stained glass windows. It is no holier than the bathroom at home or the storage room where you park the lawn mower. If God does not dwell in your heart, then he dwells nowhere in your life, however enriched may be the ecclesiastical furniture that encloses you. We are now parking ushers at the entrance of “the sanctuary” to be sure that “an atmosphere conducive to worship” has begun. All this “hush-hush” sort of thing, which we impose upon our kids by slapping their rears and twisting their ears, is completely foreign to the scriptures, and it actually keeps the saints from enjoying what God intends the assembly to be in the first place. They assembled to be with each other, not sit like a bunch of wooden Indians in front of a cigar store waiting for a professional to say something to them.

“Worship”

Worship is service, that is all the word means. The schoolteacher is “at worship” on Monday morning unscrambling an algebra problem as much as when in the assembly of the saints. And God is in His sanctuary, which is her heart, while she’s doing it, if she belongs to Him. When she, and others like her, go to the meetinghouse, then He is there because they are there, for He dwells in their hearts through the Holy Spirit. When they leave that building, then He leaves, for He does not dwell in temples made by human hands. All such signs as “Enter to Worship, Leave to Serve,” which now disgrace a growing number of doors to our “sanctuaries,” should be sent back to Rome from whence they came. There is no difference between worshipping and serving! Heb. 2:17-18 shows that Jesus served God by dying on the cross. It is the word for worship. Ro. 12:1-2 shows that everything the believer does in his body is his “spiritual worship” or reasonable service.”

A sign over the door reading”Sanctuary” is supposed to be a signal to folk that they are nearing holy ground. But there is no holy ground, place, thing, building, shrine or temple anywhere in this wide world except the human heart, and praise God for that! I am thankful that I do not have to depend on architects and carpenters to create a sanctuary for God. The glorious Lord of heaven, magnificently depicted in the Person of Jesus, can and does make a temple for himself in the humblest of men.

Those among us who talk of “five acts of worship” only reveal their ignorance of what worship really is. There is not one of the five things they list that is referred to as worship in the scriptures. Not a single one. On the other hand the scriptures make it clear that there are thousands of acts of worship (or service) that we render to Him through life, whether changing diapers, washing dishes, writing a letter, sitting with the sick, making love to one’s wife or husband, going to work, dialing the phone to check on a brother’s welfare. The Bible is abundantly clear: “Present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.” Singing, praying, communion, preaching (!), and giving or assembling are never called worship in scripture. They would be worship only in the same sense that all of life’s experience of the believer are worship.

And if tonight all the cathedrals, mosques, temples, and church edifices the world over should burn to the ground, there would be not one less sanctuary. But if you, my dear brother or sister, should be called home tonight, there would be one less sanctuary of God upon earth.

“Brotherhood”

We use this beautiful scriptural term in reference to our own particular part of the brotherhood of believers, which includes all those everywhere who are in Jesus. And we do it even when we know better. “The largest church in the brotherhood” most certainly means the largest in the “Church of Christ” or “Christian Church.” And “brotherhood problems” have no reference to those that others may be having, but only to our own, which are often rather shallow when compared to those of the larger Christian world. Indeed, brotherhood is limited to our own little sects within the Restoration Movement. “The best college in the brotherhood” is unquestionably a reference to a school of our own particular faction or fission. But the whole concept is an abuse of scripture. Brotherhood is made up of brothers and sisters, not institutions. No college is within the brotherhood of Christ, though, of course, brothers and sisters who are part of a college may be in the brotherhood. But it is they and not the institution.

At Bethany during the summer, Bill Banowsky, speaking at the Bicentennial seminar on Campbell, referred to Bethany College as “our sister institution,” which we took to mean that he considers Bethany in the same “family” as Pepperdine, where he is president. I was pleased to hear that since it reflects a growth in openness. If the colleges can get together and be sisters, maybe the brothers can get together and be brothers! But the fact remains that no college on earth is in the family of God or the brotherhood. If they want to declare a “sisterhood” between each other, due to common interests and heritage, that is just great. But this has nothing to do with brotherhood as referred to in scripture. “Love the brotherhood” (1 Pet. 2:17) is a beautiful admonition, and is the only occurrence of the term. It means something like “Love those who are related to you in Christ.” This of course means brothers and sisters, not cousins or in-laws, and includes every child of God in heaven and on earth.

“The Minister”

We still have this gentleman around in nearly all the churches, despite a growing disenchantment with the System that has created him. Even the preachers are disillusioned with the System and would like to get out, sort of, that is. Those who go beyond “sort of” have gotten out or are getting out. Among the younger set many are preparing themselves so as not to be dependent on the System. Most surprising of all is that most all our freer congregations (in denominations generally perhaps) are moving toward a more open ministry — a “mutual ministry” as the old British churches liked to call it. In some instances these churches have men employed for service, but they are servants to the community and teachers in the church rather than the minister.

There is of course no such office in scripture and no primitive congregation had any such animal as “the minister” hanging around. When he is around and the System obtains, it keeps a congregation from doing what they should be doing in assembly. It makes spectators and auditors of them instead of participants and parts of the Body, each functioning to the building up of all.

But the System remains very much with us, and it stands as one of the grossest abuses of scripture, for it makes one man “the minister” when God intends that all should be ministers. For the most part, it supplants the work of elders, the God-ordained pastors. It is a practice so obviously borrowed from “the denominations” that it is difficult to see any real difference between their practice and ours. There appears to be some slight relationship between the System and money.

“Communion”

This is applied almost exclusively to the Lord’s Supper, and it is often listed as an “item of worship” on the signboard: Communion, 10:45. Or at least it is common to hear some rushed brother or sister declare, “We made it in time for communion.” True, the Supper is referred to as a communion with the body and blood of Jesus (1 Cor. 10:17), but never is it called “the communion” in any such way as we usually employ the term.

In 2 Cor. 8:4 communion (the same word for fellowship) is used in reference to helping poor saints. Gal. 2:9 applies it to receiving one as your equal in Christ. Philip. 1:5 uses it in reference to supporting an evangelist, and Philip. 3:10 makes suffering with Christ a communion. The “communion of the Spirit” (Philip. 2:1) is a reference to the life we live in Christ through the indwelling Guest of heaven, and it has no particular reference to the Supper.

So, there is no such thing as “the communion” in scripture, for all of our life in Him is a communion or fellowship with him and with each other. It would be appropriate, if we occasionally referred to the Supper as “a communion,” as the apostle does in 1 Cor. 10:17. But giving, singing, praying, suffering, living, enjoying the Spirit are also communion. —Editor