OPPORTUNITIES IN FELLOWSHIP
Robert O. Fife

(This essay was presented to the Conference of Fellowship Together in Serving Others at the Bering Drive Church of Christ in Houston last April. Having heard it, I was so impressed that I wanted our readers to be able to read it. This is the first of two parts. —Ed.)

I. Introduction: Two incidents

At the railroad station in Mukden, Manchuria, in 1904, two Russian army officers named Rennenkampf and Samsonov got into a fist-fight. Ten years later, with the outbreak of World War I, the same officers, now generals were placed in command of two Russian armies facing the Germans. Knowing the ill will between the two, General von Hindenburg attacked General Samsonov at Tannenberg. Hindenburg knew that his own outnumbered forces would be no match for the combined Russian armies. But he rightly predicted that Rennenkampf would not come to Samsonov's aid. The German army surrounded Samsonov's forces and destroyed them. Samsonov committed suicide. Then Hindenburg turned on Rennenkampf and forced him to retreat from East Prussia.

Viewing the event, a German officer said, "If the battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton, the battle of Tannenberg was lost on the railway platform at Mukden." The friendships formed in school had enabled the allied leaders at Waterloo to march united to victory. The enmity spawned at Mukden left the Russian generals divided and defeated.

Since being invited to address the theme before us, I have had difficulty putting this vignette from history aside. It seems to me that it speaks to us who are gathered to consider whether we who profess the Name of Jesus may labor together despite our differences, or whether our various differences are of such import as to forbid any common endeavors.

The historical incident to which I have referred involved a bitter, rancorous spirit harbored for years. We must confess that such a spirit has not been altogether absent among us. But most of us are like the soldiers who served under the Russian generals. They were committed to Mother Russia. We are committed to the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ. They did what they believed to be their duty. So would we. But in doing their duty, soldiers who had never heard of Mukden found their fate bound up with what happened there. So is our present situation profoundly influenced by events which have preceded us, events both glorious and tragic.

Having been in the Service, I can well imagine there were indeed differences between the two Russian armies. So are we aware of differences among ourselves. But we must ask, Are these differences of such significance that we ought not, indeed cannot, join together to face a common enemy? Are our differences of such magnitude that they overshadow the common faith we confess in our Lord and Saviour Jesus the Messiah?

Because we may not in everything see eye to eye, can we not do anything shoulder to shoulder?

During our time together we shall be hearing of victories won through our working together. But unfortunately, such endeavors are not very common among us. In community after community Churches of Christ and Christian Churches pursue their own agendas, being either indifferent to each other, or often actually in opposition. Thus our call for restoration for the sake of unity, for the sake of mission has been brought into disrepute.

Once the Restoration Movement marched victoriously across the land, winning multitudes for our Christ and His Church. Indeed, it seemed for a while that the "Current Reformation" which our fathers advocated would win the nation. Now, in community after community we are in disarray over cups, classes, missionary societies, television programs, musical instruments, the role of women, and the authority of elders. Until these issues are settled, many of our congregations have been led to believe they dare not march together lest they be found faithless.

An accusing finger has often been pointed at those who introduced the organ, or who chose to work through missionary societies. But it seems no one is free from accusation, for across the whole spectrum of our differences each segment places the blame for division on the group which introduced the "innovations" it opposes, or opposes the "innovations" it approves.

We have become so involved in mutual finger-pointing and recrimination that the real Enemy laughs with delight. Knowing our hesitation to join forces for battle, he marshalls his militant regiments of secularism, materialism, drugs, sexual perversion, broken homes, cults and other false religions. Thus we, too, have become terribly vulnerable to the old strategy of "divide and conquer." Could it be that the Restoration Movement's battle for the soul of America has already been lost at our Mukdens?

The second incident is found in the Gospel according to Mark. There we read,

John said unto him, Teacher, we saw one casting out demons in thy name; and we forbade him, because he followed not us. But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man who shall do a mighty work in my name, and be able quickly to speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is for us. (Mk. 9:38-40).

I realize that for some, this incident bears no relationship to our present situation. The reason is that these brethren believe very strongly that congregations which exercised their autonomy to work through missionary societies, or use instruments in worship have violated the authority of Jesus. As Max R. Miller wrote a year ago concerning Restoration Forum IV in Contending For The Faith (April, 1986). Italics are mine:

The title [of the Forum] assumes unity; the announced topics for discussion imply that unity has been accomplished. Just how the two divided bodies may worship together is not slated for discussion. There can be no unity — no Biblical fellowship in any degree — until this chasm can be spanned.

"No Biblical fellowship in any degree," says the article. Does this mean that if we cannot worship together, we are forbidden to serve together? Not even to the extent of joining to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the sick, minister to the dying, or proclaim the Gospel?

If as some say, "worship" is what takes place in our assemblies on the Lord's Day, why should they object to our associating together "outside of worship" to do the Lord's will in the world?

I believe that the story of the "Unknown Wonderworker" does speak to our situation. Note the similarities:

First, the "Unknown Wonderworker" believed in the Name of Jesus. So do we.

Second, he used the Name of Jesus to perform works which Jesus would have done. So have we sought to do the Lord's will.

Third, Jesus honored the "Unknown Wonderworker's" use of His Name by granting His mighty power. We daily pray for the same blessing.

Fourth, despite the obvious evidence that Jesus was working through the "Unknown Wonderworker," the Twelve forbade him to continue.

So have some groups among us thought to monopolize the saving power of Jesus.

Fifth, the prohibition by the Twelve was made on their own authority.

Some among us have presumed similar authority.

Sixth, the reason for the prohibition was their sectarian spirit. Significantly, it would appear that there is not in this whole movement a leader who has not been excluded by someone.

Seventh, Jesus refused to approve of their prohibition. Neither is He bound to honor ours.

Eighth, as an ultimate irony, the Twelve had just failed to heal a demon possessed child. How often have we judged others who were doing greater works than we?

Ninth, when the Twelve enquired why they had failed, Jesus said, "This kind can go out by nothing, save by prayer." (Mk 9:17-29)

Perhaps we should hear again the words of the Last Will and Testament of the Springfield Presbytery: "We will that the preachers and people, cultivate a spirit of mutual forbearance; pray more, and dispute less; and while they behold the signs of the times, look up, and confidently expect that redemption draweth nigh."

The point of this incident which speaks so loudly to us is that the power of Jesus' Name is not subject to any limitations which we may presume to impose upon it. So some may refuse to join us in exalting the Lord by seeking to cooperate together in doing His will. But we choose not to forbid any good work done in His Name simply because someone "is not of us." I believe that if a disciple is doing Jesus' work through the power of Jesus' Name, He is one of us! Where the power of Jesus' Name is, there is Jesus; and where Jesus is, there is His Church.

But let me address our subject through another question:

II. Does Fellowship in Anything Constitute Approval of Everything?

This seems to be a genuine problem for many earnest brothers and sisters - a problem which our Movement must resolve. Let us examine it in the form of some simple questions:

Is it true that those who cannot in conscience worship together, ought not for the sake of conscience serve together? If I have "fellowship in any degree" with someone in error, am I "fellowshiping his error?" If so, am I prepared to have Jesus apply the same judgment toward me? If Christ died for us "while we were yet sinners," on what ground do I limit my fellowship to "perfect" saints?

But let us for the moment place the question amidst common life. Am I "endorsing the error" of a brother if I pump the water to fill a cup which he would give in the Name of Jesus to a famished soul? Am I "endorsing the sin" of a lifeboat crew if I man an oar to help rescue drowning seamen? If an orphanage were burning would I dare to join a bucket brigade drawn from the local pub, if it might save the children? If only one chaplain were allowed on death row, would I refuse to support him if he were Pre-Millennial?

What is the point of such questions? It is to demonstrate the fact that the purpose of one's involvement determines what he is "endorsing." The purpose of pumping the water for the "erring brother" is not to approve of his "error," but to help save a famished soul. The purpose of manning the lifeboat is not to approve the lifestyles of the crew, but to rescue the shipwrecked. The purpose of joining the bucket brigade is not to endorse the local pub, but to save the children. The purpose of supporting the chaplain on death row is not to endorse Pre-Millennialism. Rather, it is to assure that condemned prisoners have an opportunity to confess Jesus before they meet Him in eternity.

The questions also demonstrate the ground of one's involvement. That ground is my understanding of the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Surely, I ought not think that He would rather see the famished fall, than that I help an "erring brother" minister the water of life. Surely, Jesus would not rather that the shipwrecked perish than that I join with "sinners" in their rescue. Surely, Jesus would not have me stand aside while children perish, rather than join with the regulars of the local pub to save them. Surely, Jesus would not rather the prisoner die without the Gospel, than have the Gospel preached to him by a Pre-Millennialist.

It is therefore obvious that fellowship in something does not itself constitute approval of everything. We need to do away with that notion, or else we are doomed to fragment over and over again into a scattered army of little remaining use to our King. How often has fear of seeming to approve of some group's "error," caused us to refuse their hands extended for meeting the enormous need of a dying world?

Do we not know that our attempt to please Jesus by avoiding "fellowshiping error," may actually bring His judgment for failing to do what only united hands could accomplish? How tragic it would be to appear before Him in garments "unsullied by error," only to hear Him say,

"Inasmuch as ye did it not unto one of these least, ye did it not unto me." (Mt. 25:45).

My brethren, the apostle Paul was willing to become "accursed" for the sake of Israel's salvation (Rom 9:3). And I am willing to pay whatever price is necessary to cooperate with "erring brethren" in doing the work of Jesus in the world. If to accomplish His mission the Saviour "ate with sinners," surely, to accomplish ours, we may by grace cooperate with "mistaken saints!"

___________________________

The next issue of this journal will be the September number. We do not publish in July or August.

When you send us a change of address please give us both your old and new addresses.

If you receive a sample copy of this journal, it is your invitation to subscribe on a regular basis at only $5 a year or two years for $8.