Fellowship: Its Spirit and Practice (CMPA)
"I and my Father are one." Can there be any simpler yet more
profound description of true fellowship than these words of the Lord Jesus? In
the days of his flesh the beloved Son of God made his Father's will his own and
glorified Hun in all his ways. The Father acknowledged the Son as the one "in
whom I am well pleased" and glorified him with His own self. The sharing of the
divine will which enabled Christ to identify himself so closely with God was
completed by a participation in the divine glory and nature.
The sharing of a common aim, the doing of things together so
that two or more may be as one, a bond created between giver and receiver -- all
these ideas are contained in the Scriptural concept of fellowship, of which the
prime example is the relationship between God and a man begotten of Him yet of
our nature, and described as "in the bosom of the Father", declaring the glory
of God, the Son whom the Father loveth and into whose hands He giveth all
things. [The word "koinonia" occurs something like twenty times in the NT. It
can refer (a) to sharing one's goods or wealth with those in need, and may then
be translated "contribution", or "distribution", or "to communicate" (Rom 15:26;
2Co 8:4; 9:13; Heb 13:16); (b) to participation in a common life of faith, which
would include the Breaking of Bread (Acts 2:42; Gal 2:9; Phi 1:5; 2:1; 1Jo
1:3,4); (c) to association with the Lord Jesus Christ (which would also include
the Breaking of Bread) and with his Father (1Co 1:9; 10:16; 2Co 6:14; 13:14; Eph
3:9; Phi 3:10; 1Jo 1:3,6).]
John 10:30; Mat 3:17; John 20:17; 1:18; John 3:35.
The Believers' Fellowship with the Father and the
Son
In this fellowship others may share. Indeed, the very will of
the Father which the Son made his own was that other sons should be brought unto
the same glory. "And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be
sanctified through the truth... that they all may be as one, as thou, Father,
art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us... And I have declared
unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved
me may be in them, and I in them."
This was "the apostles' fellowship", but the Lord specifically
included "them also which shall believe on me through their word". The aim of
the apostolic preaching of the things they had seen and heard, and of which they
had been a part, was that those to whom it was declared "might have fellowship
with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son, Jesus
Christ."
John 17:19-21, 26; Acts 2:42; John 1:1-3.
The distinctive quality -- indeed the distinctive test -- of
this fellowship is that it binds together those who by human standards seem to
have nothing in common. Worldly "fellowships" aim to exclude those who have not
the skill, knowledge, social status or money to belong to them. There is only
one thing with which all men are by nature "in fellowship", and that is sin and
its consequences -- a fellowship which does nothing to bind men together, but
which leads to "wars and fightings". It is when we realize the true nature of
"fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness" and our total inability to do
anything about our condition, that we appreciate the greatness of the mercy of
God who was "in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself" and of the privilege
of being called into fellowship with God and His Son. [There is a related verb,
"koinoneo", which is used in similar ways, (a) of giving to those in need (Rom
12:13; 15:27; Gal 6:6; Phi 4:15), (b) of the relationship between
fellow-believers (Rom 15:27), and (c) of association with our Lord; though we
have also here a negative use (Heb 2:14; 1Pe 4:13), (d) of having fellowship
with forbidden deeds or doctrines, against which the saints are warned (1Ti
5:22; 2Jo 1:11; there is similar warning in use of "koinonia" in 2Co
6:14).]
James 4:1; Eph 5: 11; 2Co 5:19.
The Believers' Fellowship with One Another
The believers' fellowship with one another not only depends
upon their relationship with the Father and the Son -- it is an essential part
of it. The idea that one can exist without the other has no support in
Scripture. Divine fellowship is bound up with the corporate life and witness of
a community: it is a living fellowship. For the perfection in unity of apostles
and believers the Lord prayed, both so "that the world may believe that thou
hast sent me", and "that the world may know that thou hast loved them, as thou
hast loved me."
John declares in his first Epistle that unless our fellowship
with each other is real, our claim to fellowship with God is a hollow sham. "He
that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath
not seen ?" The test of obedience is the test of love. "Living in the light" and
having fellowship with God is not a matter of sentimental feelings and language,
but of loving God in deed and in truth. It is the love of God in giving Jesus
for our sins which makes it possible for us to join the family of God as His
children, and therefore as brother and sister one with another. Those who walk
in the light, as He is in the light, John says, may enjoy true fellowship with
each other.
For a brother to claim this divine fellowship, but to treat
lightly or harshly his relationship with his brethren, is to miss the mark
completely. No distinction should be made between brother and brother on the
grounds of social status, wealth or intellect, or claims to superior knowledge
or enlightenment. The idea of an inner circle, a spiritual elite, is foreign to
the apostles' teaching. According to the Scriptures, "there is neither Jew nor
Greek; there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye
are all one in Christ Jesus." Where the Scriptures make a. distinction between
brethren, it is to impose upon "the strong" the duty of sustaining "the
weak".
Eph 4:15-16; John 17:21-23; 1Jo 4:9-16,20,21; 2:10; Jam 2:1-4;
1Co 12:12,13; Gal 3:28; Rom 15:1.
The Basis of Fellowship
What then is the basis of our fellowship? Is it the doctrine
we have come to believe? Is the breaking of bread together this fellowship of
which we speak? It is neither, yet it is both: it is greater than either and
greater than their sum. The heart-searching message of the day of Pentecost
which caused "all that believed" to be "together" and to have "all things
common", led to a joyful experience. Luke says, "They continued stedfastly in
the apostles' doctrine and in fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the
prayers."
The things believed led to a response in baptism; a new
association with the Father and Son who came unto them and made their abode with
them, as the Lord had promised; a fellowship with those of the same faith and
obedience; a showing forth together of the Lord's death and resurrection by the
''many" who were "one bread"; and the spiritual experience of the communal
approach to the Father. In all these things "they continued
stedfastly".
So their fellowship was based not merely on an assent to the
apostles' doctrine, although it could not have existed without it; nor was it
the act of breaking bread, although this could not have been omitted. It was not
the charitable feeling or the sense of joy and gladness, although this was an
essential characteristic of the sharers in a common faith. It was through the
perseverance in all these things that fellowship was maintained, with the Father
and Son and with each other. Basic beliefs found expression in a living
fellowship of which each aspect was a natural part of the whole.
Acts 2:42 (RV); Acts 2:44-46; 1Co 10:16,17.
Persevering in Fellowship
There is a Scriptural doctrine of perseverance, which reveals
fellowship as a continuous attention to the teaching and the practice of "the
faith once delivered to the saints", and a growing in grace and knowledge. The
language of John 15 :16,17 shows that the Lord had chosen and ordained his
disciples that they should keep on bearing fruit, the fruit itself should
continue, the Father would never fail to give what was asked in Christ's name,
and those who kept his commands would persist in their love for one another. The
believers were exhorted to "give diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in
the bond of peace", because in the one body, one spirit, one faith, one hope,
one Lord, one baptism, it was the one Father who was over, through and in all of
them.
The test of continuance revealed those who were not "of us",
who only "endured for a while". They did not "abide in the light". Yet this
"patience and faith of the saints" is not based upon personal will power and
energy; it is achieved by those who humbly trust that He who "hath begun a good
work in you will perform it until the day of Christ".
2Pe 3:18; John 15:16-17; Eph 4: 1-6; 1Jo 2:9; Rev 13:10; Phi
1:6.
The Statement of Faith
Practical necessity has forced upon us a use of the word
"fellowship" which, regrettably, has often caused it to be given a technical
rather than a spiritual sense. It is used as the equivalent of section or
faction; it describes something which is withdrawn, resumed, or withheld; and
even as a description of things shared in common, it has sometimes merely meant
a common opposition to a view taken by some other group. All this is far removed
from the spiritual meaning of the word as used by the Apostle John.
Even so, the attempt has been made to capture the spirit of
the first century fellowship in our own ecclesial arrangements. The object of a
statement of faith is to provide a basis of fellowship, not of disfellowship,
although like the love of God itself, it is both inclusive and exclusive. When
God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son for its salvation, it
was evidence that He "will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge
of the truth." The limitation of "whosoever believeth in him", however, upholds
the very principles upon which that love was based. Although no formal set of
words can guarantee true unity of the Spirit, our statement of faith is a human
expression of what we accept as our common basis of belief; it is the framework
of faith gleaned from the Scriptures. It is essential to recognize both its
importance and its limitations.
Nowhere in Old or New Testament is there a systematic
statement of faith. The Bible does, however, state principles and illustrate
them by example in such a way as to convince us that such propositions as, say,
"There is no immortal soul" are true. In addition it gives case histories which
show how doctrinal propositions arose. If there were in Corinth for a short time
some misguided people who said that there is no resurrection of the dead, it
would have been impossible to retain such people "in fellowship" after Paul had
written 1Co 15. Whatever is meant by "abiding not in the doctrine of Christ" and
"confessing not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh", John's instructions in
his Second Epistle would emphatically exclude from the community the heretics
who denied this doctrine. If there were those who would have tolerated incest in
the community, they could have no title to do so after Paul had written 1Co
5.
In response to similar needs we have drawn up our own
statement and although we must not impute to it inspiration or infallibility (a
statement of faith is no substitute for the living faith itself), for
Christadelphians, whose faith is Bible-based, it is a distillation of the truth
we have agreed to hold "with one accord". Because no human statement can be
perfect and sufficient for all time, it will from time to time give rise to
questions or discussions or interpretations -- or even amendment as has been the
case in the past.
1Ti 2:4; John 3:16; 1Co 15:12-23; 2Jo 1:9-11; 1Co 5; 1Ti 1:15;
4:9, etc; Acts 1:14; 2:1; 2:46.
The Scriptures the Basis
It is the Word of God alone and not the Statement of Faith
which produces faith. When someone wishes to become a Christadelphian, the
question is not primarily whether he accepts the Statement of Faith but whether
he holds the Bible teaching on which it is based. It is important to have our
priorities right and not impute to any human writing, whoever wrote it, the
power to produce saving faith and to be the authoritative basis for it. This is
not to underestimate the value of the Statement: it is simply to put it in
perspective.
The value of the Statement of Faith and its importance in
fellowship is that it is a definition of what we have agreed to hold as
Scripture teaching in all its essentials. [Statements other than the Birmingham
Amended Statement have always been regarded as acceptable amongst ecclesias in
the Central Fellowship, provided that they uphold the same Bible Teaching.]
Viewed negatively, where there is no common faith there can be no true
fellowship, because we cannot share that relationship with each other which is
an essential part of our fellowship with the Father and the Son. Put positively,
the Statement of Faith can form a basis of fellowship -- a conviction of the
common faith which issues in baptism and a promise to be Christlike -- but only
if we couple with the tenets of belief the life to be lived. Because the
Statement of Faith says much about the one and little about the other, and to
this extent is incomplete, some have tended to produce an imbalance of emphasis
as between believing and living. [In many ecclesial constitutions the inclusion
of The Commandments of Christ helps to correct this imbalance, provided they are
the object of regular reflection through the daily readings, prayer and
meditation.] Indeed, it is a grave error to attempt to separate the two, as
though we could be truly believing without becoming like Christ, or truly
growing in Christ without believing. Belief is no mere assent to a set of
principles: it is a relationship between God and man based on an acceptance of
the Word of God.
The Need for Order In the Community
It is clear from the reading of the Old and New Testaments
that community life is part of worship. A community needs order and method in
what it does, otherwise it will sow the seeds of its own destruction. The New
Testament makes it plain that the apostles expected the ecclesias to have
decency and order in their arrangements, but the same apostle who wrote, "Let
all things be done decently and in order", also wrote, to the same ecclesia,
"Let all your things be done with charity." Some of our ecclesial behaviour may
smack more of law than of grace; and it behoves all of us, not least those who
have charge of our affairs, to remember that two quite different duties, both
alike Christian, confront us. The one says that a community of people accepting
a common basis for their association should not encourage its members to treat
lightly the basis which they have undertaken to uphold. The other says that
there are varying degrees of proficiency in the Scriptures among our members,
and bids, "Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful
disputations." Through differences in age (the very old and the very young being
specially vulnerable), and training, and disposition, ability to grasp the fine
distinctions which some doctrinal discussions involve, and to make wholly
logical deductions from accepted premises, varies enormously from member to
member. Precious though the gift of precise thinking may be, it can become
unbearably tyrannical if over-pressed; and we must beware of the danger of
making it seem that salvation, or even fellowship itself, is a matter of
competence in logic and consistency in exposition. On the other hand, mere
dogmatism unsupported by sound Scriptural reasoning, is not conducive to healthy
fellowship. If we administer the letter of the Statement of Faith without regard
for its spiritual meaning, we have forsaken Christ for a system of justification
which cannot be supported by Scripture. The teaching of Christ and of the Gospel
through all Scripture is clear enough: "For if righteousness came by the law,
then Christ died in vain."
On the other hand, if any man would play fast and loose with
the Statement of Faith by driving his heretical chariot through "legal"
loopholes in the wording, he has missed the meaning of fellowship and the proper
use of our common basis. We are not to seek cover for any fundamental
differences between ourselves and those with whom we are in fellowship by
exploiting flaws in the human wording which gives expression to that fellowship.
The warm spirit of fellowship which does exist between brethren throughout the
world has grown in a community with the Statement of Faith as its agreed basis.
It is not honourable to enjoy the one without accepting the other. If our views
are unquestionably and fundamentally at variance with the plain intention of the
Statement of Faith, then the honourable thing is to acknowledge this difference
and to make it plain that we cannot subscribe to the apostles' doctrine and
fellowship as understood by the Christadelphians. We must not mistake laxity for
grace. We must uphold in a spirit of love and compassion the Statement upon
which fellowship is based, but this does not mean that we need not observe it or
call upon others to do so.
Gal 2:21 (RV); 1Co 14:40; 16:14.
The Need to Uphold the Basis
We do rightly therefore, when interviewing prospective members
of our community, to ensure for their sakes and ours that we have a common
understanding and belief. It follows that any member who unquestionably departs
from this position and does not respond to loving appeals to preserve the unity
of belief, has already broken the bond of fellowship with his brethren and the
ecclesia confirms this in its reluctant act of withdrawal. The same is true of
behaviour unworthy of the name of Christ, if this is not repented of and
acknowledged.
Since each ecclesia has agreed to hold as the basis for its
existence the written expression of its beIiefs as found in the Statement of
Faith, it is in honour bound to uphold that. Each ecclesia is the custodian for
its own members of that common faith. The members have given willing assent to
that faith when seeking fellowship with the ecclesia and the community of
eccIesias which form the Brotherhood. No member may teach doctrines clearly
inconsistent with that faith nor ought an ecclesia to retain in its fellowship
one so acting. It is noteworthy that in his epistles Paul addresses individual
ecclesias as though they were the whole household of God, and in his
commendation of his fellow helpers from one ecclesia to another, assumes a
spiritual relationship between them. Each ecclesia administers its own affairs,
but it does so upon common principles which must be upheld. Our Brotherhood
throughout the world exists only because we have agreed to behave in that
way.
Rom 1:5,6; 1Co 1:2; 2Co 1:1; 1Th 1:1; etc; Rom 6:1-4; 1Co
16:10,19-20, etc.
The promulgation of a doctrine inconsistent with our mutual
faith, the disruptive influence of personalities, or often a combination of
these things, produces schism. But whether the schismatic influence arises
through doctrine or behaviour, it is no excuse for the rest of the ecclesia or
Brotherhood to drive the wedge deeper between brother and brother. Schism as a
policy is wrong: it is roundly condemned in Scripture as one of the "manifest
works of the flesh". Brethren in Christ must practise reconciliation, atonement
and unity, not seeking to expose sins but to recover the sinner. They have no
authority from Christ to mark up the failings of others and to make known from
the housetops their deviations and sin. "Love keeps no score of wrong, does not
gloat over other men's sins, but delights in truth." We should be no wedge
drivers but reconcilers, and not fall into the error of rejoicing more over the
one sheep that is lost than over the one that is found, over withdrawing
fellowship rather than restoring it.
Gal 5:20; 2Ti 2:24-26 (RV); 1Co 13:6 (NEB).
Dealing with Error
What then if there is persistent and unmistakable error? If
the ecclesia is to live up to its name, then it must seek to find unity, and
only when all else has failed will it contemplate severing fellowship.
Meanwhile, other ecclesias should not seek to pronounce their own judgments or
to ventilate the alleged errors of brethren not under their care. From wide
experience, it can be said that facts are hard things to ascertain on the spot,
let alone at a distance. Moreover, the spoken exchange is frequently very
different from extracts which appear in writing and words spoken under duress
are given various interpretations according to the mood of the reader.
Ecclesias should understand that they do not live to
themselves. Their decisions matter, since they form the. basis not only of
fellowship within their ecclesial family circle but also with the wider
Brotherhood. Decisions should be arrived at honourably and in full accordance
with our mutual basis, and when so reached they should be respected by other
ecclesias. For other ecclesias to push too far their own differing judgments
against an individual brother, or against an ecclesia, produces fragmentation
and ecclesial anarchy. If a brother who has been withdrawn from by his home
ecclesia seeks to join another, the first step which the second ecclesia must
take is to ascertain, with discernment and charity, from the brother himself and
from his former ecclesia, what were the grounds of the loss of fellowship. There
is no other circumstance in which the second ecclesia should become involved and
there is no other way in which satisfactorily to heal the breach not only
between the brother and the community but also between himself and his ecclesia.
Nor is it open to the second eccIesia to receive the brother without thorough
examination of the circumstances, in the hope that by ignoring the original
breach some kind of restoration can be effected. Furthermore, if the issue is
fundamental, it should not be difficult for both ecclesias to agree on what
should be done, provided that the decision is based on Scriptural principles. If
it is not fundamental, then there may be room for differences of judgment. In
any case, the grounds for arriving at judgment by the ecclesias concerned should
be clearly set forth. As provided for in the Ecclesial Guide, the second
ecclesia might finally decide to accept the brother in the full knowledge of the
circumstances and after full consultation with the first ecclesia. Though such
cases are and should remain few, they may on occasions be inevitable.
Causes of Disharmony
All that being said, it should not be the custom for a brother
withdrawn from in one ecclesia to go from ecclesia to ecclesia in the hope that
one will finally accept him as a member. Such persistence inevitably leads to
trouble. When dissension arises over cases of this kind, there is as much
trouble from the personality of the brother as there is from his teaching. Our
community has often suffered more from personality troubles than from other
forms of heresy. There are those who cause disharmony among brethren
irrespective of the particular views they hold. Anyone who aggressively persists
in such action so as to separate true brethren is wrong in spirit.
Tit 3:10,11.
The position of individual ecciesias is more difficult to
ascertain. For this reason extreme care is necessary in considering the
relationships between one ecclesia and the rest of the Brotherhood. Very rarely
will an ecclesia as a whole become the teacher of error; in such circumstances
it would find itself at odds with neighbouring and other ecclesias. The question
would thus be resolved by discussions between the ecclesias concerned.
Occasionally, however, when differences of view arise concerning an individual
brother, inter-ecclesial relationships should be determined by the general
procedure indicated in the previous section. The whole subject merits further
close consideration.
Respecting the Boundaries of Fellowship
It is one of the lamentable features of our community that
over the years there have been schismatic influences which have in the end
created separate "fellowships". Looking back, it is possible to level criticism
at the spirit and the method in which the affairs were carried through, or on
the other hand it is possible to justify the action then taken. Of one thing we
can be sure: no one ever knows all the facts, and if we imagine that the
"fellowships" which now exist are the same as those which were created at the
time of the separation, we shall almost certainly be mistaken.
But that is no excuse for ignoring the existing boundaries of
fellowship. To act in such a way is to do despite to the brethren who have gone
before and to treat irresponsibly the beliefs of ourselves and others. The
boundaries must be respected until we find a means of healing the breach on
sound and mutually accepted lines. Those who have had experience in repairing
such breaches can testify that some of the greatest hindrances to their work
have been brethren who moved irresponsibly between fellowships, as though
barriers did not exist. The only way in which breaches can be healed is to
proceed prayerfully, sympathetically, and truthfully with the Bible in hand and
Christ in the heart, in order eventually to produce a common declaration of
intent fully in accord with soundly based essential doctrines. In carrying out
this process, no one has the right to hold an inquisition on individual brethren
in the "other" fellowship. The responsibility lies with their ecclesias to apply
the principles of the agreement. Witch-hunting, real or imaginary, is no part of
the work of a servant of Christ. A right attitude to this would have saved the
waste of tons of paper which has been shot like ammunition (and in the same
spirit) from the homes of individual self-appointed judges or from upstart
committees having no ecclesial basis. Our behaviour in these matters must be
Christlike; we must know what spirit we are of. Idle gossip, rumour-mongering
and the spread of malicious talk, which in other circles would be regarded as
libelous, have no part in the household of God, whether the talk is about those
within or those without. Those without God will judge: we must remember, however
that in the long run judgment will come home to the house of God. With what
measure we mete and with what judgment we judge, we shall ourselves individually
and communally be assessed.
1Co 6:13; 1Pe 4:17; Mat 7:1-5.
Preserving the Unity already Attained
In the past two decades breaches between the Central
Fellowship and the Berean brethren in America, the former Central and Suffolk
Street Fellowships in Britain and in Australasia have been healed by patience
and understanding and on sound principles. There was considerable rejoicing on
earth when those events took place and we would hope to learn that heaven too
shared the joy. Since then the world has become a small place and there is
constant exchange of visits between all its parts -- a powerful factor in the
strengthening of communal bonds and the opportunity for greater understanding of
each other, but bringing also the danger of the quick spread of any new rift or
divisive tendencies. All the more reason then to be alive to our
responsibilities and to the true basis for our fellowship -- the living
relationship with God through the Lord Jesus Christ and the revealed word. It is
imperative that we "continue stedfastly" to practise peacemaking and to preserve
unity, not at all costs, but as a principle by which we subsist. For us who have
achieved so much under God's blessing in the last two decades, it would be
disastrous and culpable to forsake our true calling for internecine strife.
Mutually destructive criticism were far better replaced by searching
self-examination. Our brother's deadly sins are no excuse for spreading our own
poisonous talk. Our primary purpose must be his recovery and not his loss, and
this can be achieved only by love and not by hate.
Being brethren of the same family and under the same Head, we
should esteem any loss as his loss, and any gain as his gain, when righteously
done in his name. All this is for a purpose and is not an end in itself. We are
seeking an eternal fellowship for ourselves and should strive with all our
hearts to ensure it for our brethren. "May the love of God and the grace of our
Lord Jesus Christ and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit" be with us until he
come.
1Co 1:9-13; Rom 16:17,18; 2Co 3:14.
The Committee of The Christadelphian
December 1971
