After
a few weeks study at St. John's University and Abbey, I am impressed by
the perceptive Roman Catholic analysis of the weaknesses of
Protestantism. They insist that Protestants are pressed between two
unacceptable extremes. One extreme grows out of the assumption that man
has an individual obligation to judge Bible truth. As a result, "a
principle of disunity is embedded in the very essence of Protestantism."
On the other hand, in order to escape this evil, Protestants are guilty
of hacking away at the body of essential truth of Christianity until
they "sap it of all conviction." (What Price Unity?" America, May 5,
1945, p. 95).
Of
course, Catholics are not so perceptive in analyzing the appalling
consequences of their own alternative to the Protestant dilemma. It
hardly seems an improvement when one is asked to swallow a body of
divine truth rooted in historical corruption, Biblical ignorance, and
the intellectual intolerance of the Roman Catholic tradition. A Roman
Catholic does indeed have his own certified brand of truth and unity,
but he pays a staggering price.
But
what of the Protestant predicament? I am not a Protestant, but it
strikes me that there is a lesson for Christians to learn by examining
the apparent incompatibility of truth and unity. The core truth of the
lesson is that a belief in individual responsibility means one also
believes in division. I unabashedly accept that conclusion.
Protestantism, as a system of human religion supposedly reflecting the
wisdom of good men, is indeed vulnerable to the taunts of Rome.
Protestants ought to be ashamed that they can do no better. But
Christians should understand that a rigorous search for truth
necessitates that "there must be also heresies among you."
(1 Cor. 11:19)
The
Bible clearly teaches that division serves a useful and necessary
function in the church. The acceptance of unity at any price will
eventually "leaven" the whole body — such unity levels all to the lowest
common denominator.
(1 Cor. 5:6-7) Division is necessary so that "they which are
approved may be made manifest among you."
(1 Cor. 11:19)
If the only vestige of the true church that existed today was the
liberal Christian churches, I believe it would be impossible to
distinguish the church of the Lord from every other form of religion. In
the same way, if there is to be a church of Christ in another fifty
years, it will be in the conservative churches today. Whatever might be
the intention and hopes of many of those associated with liberal
churches of Christ, it seems historically absurd to believe that after
one or two more generations these churches will offer a distinctive
alternative to the chaos of Protestantism. Finally, division is
necessary to preserve the peace and sanity of the kingdom. (Rom. 14:1).
A group united in the "same mind and the same judgment" (1 Cor. 1:10) —
and only such a group — can take to the world a message of hope and
peace.
This is
not to say that division is good in any absolute sense. It quite
obviously is not, and Jesus prayed fervently that his disciples would be
one. (Jn 17:11)
He made it quite clear that Christian division would be a source
of confusion to those who were not disciples. But if religious unity
among all men of good will is desirable, the Bible never intimates that
it is a practical end to be expected by Christians in history.
It is
true that a Christian is obliged to work with both a love of the truth
and a desire for unity. It is true also that Romans 14 teaches that
under some circumstances two can walk together who do not agree and that
a Christian is always ready to engage in dialogue about what is
"essential" as a basis for doctrinal unity. There is no easy formula
which answers all of the questions one must face in a lifetime. A
Christian will take the issues one at a time, day by day, person by
person, and weigh the respective tugs of truth and unity.
One
could miss the central truth in this lesson, however, by gagging over
the unpleasant day to day confrontations which arise. Practical problems
should never obscure the very real Bible principle that truth is
divisive. Again and again, those who start with a commitment to truth
become weary along the endless trek through barren deserts of debate,
bickering, and Biblical legalism and opt for peace and unity. Some
become too sweet-spirited to stomach the bitterness that is a part of
division.
Some
become tired of the long and tedious discussions of seemingly trivial
subjects. Some long for the enlightened company of those who do not
honor the truth. Some become exasperated by their human inability to
find a final resting place, to fight the last battle and lay their armor
down. They retreat in dismay. So many are overwhelmed by the
responsibility for division which every man shoulders when he picks up
his Bible to read it as the literal and comprehendible word of God.
Over
and over again in the history of Christianity the weary have dejectedly
begun the long and fruitless journey toward compromise and unity. In the
minds of nineteenth-century Disciples of Christ, the quest for peace
came quickly and logically to exclude the concept of the "restoration"
of true religion. The renewed interest in "unity" movements in the
church today stems, I believe, from the same mentality. It is a mind
which has lost its spiritual toughness, which can no longer tolerate the
consequences of a belief in individually perceived religious truth.
Although we tend to see all of our differences in terms of case studies
the ever present and argumentative "what would you do if" — they are
generally, I believe, much more a matter of mood. Some come to love too
much the sweet fruits of unity and to hate unreasonably the purifying
exhilaration of strife. One who feels in mortal danger on one horn of
the dilemma proposed by Roman Catholics is likely to be gored by the
other.
I am
not ashamed to admit that my teaching is divisive. Jesus came with a
sword. I have helped to divide churches; I expect to divide more. I have
also helped to unite churches that were needlessly and shamefully
divided. Unity is wonderful in the truth of God; division is needed when
the truth is at stake. It would be more comfortable if the dilemma were
not there — but it is. We must live life as it is. If you have deep
convictions, you must be prepared for careful, courteous, certain
confrontation.