One mind
"Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all
speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be
perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment" (1Co
1:10).
Such verses as this have been sadly distorted by those who
justify divisions. Their reasoning is circuitous and tortuous: 'Paul says we
should all agree perfectly and have no divisions. Our ecclesial members do not
agree perfectly on such-and-such. Consequently we must divide from those who
disagree, in order that we have no divisions among us!'
The point overlooked is this: Paul is admonishing the brethren
to the pursuit of an ideal -- perfect oneness in mind and spirit among the
brethren. Just because the ecclesia does not immediately achieve such harmony is
no reason to throw up one's hands and separate. Does Paul say here anything
about separation? Even an imperfect unity must be preserved and nurtured, not
dismantled because it has a flaw.
"Fellowship is primarily a 'community of interest' rather than individual
advantage. It is the family sharing which keeps Father, Son and believers in a
unity of belief as well as purpose; and as far as Father and Son are concerned,
this unity is an unbreakable one. But in the hands of believers in the ecclesia
it can be a fragile thing, so unpredictable is the human heart. Paul was very
conscious of this and exhorted the Corinthian ecclesia: 'Now I beseech you,
brethren.. that ye be perfectly joined together.' In practice this vital
doctrine of the unity of the Household cannot be manifested without the
dedicated effort of every member of each ecclesia. It is, by the Father's will
and help, a cooperative and precious creation made possible by the shed blood of
Jesus. This whole conception of fellowship is at once magnificent and humbling;
but it can be broken: by the disagreement of an individual member with his
ecclesia, or vice-versa" (JM, "The Living Ecclesia", Xd
108:56).
In the same context of his Corinthian letter, the apostle
stresses that the brethren were called unto the fellowship of God's Son (1Co
1:9). It is a striking concept, reminiscent of the Lord's words: "I will draw
all men to me" (Joh 12:32) and "Him that cometh unto me I will in no wise cast
out" (Joh 6:37). Here is the strongest affirmation of the principle that our
"fellowship" is not ours alone -- it is God's and Christ's. And any unilateral
attempts by men to subvert or destroy this sublime unity, without clear and
certain and incontrovertible evidence from the Bible, is a direct affront to
Heaven.
Far from commanding an absolute unity as a condition of
fellowship, Paul's words in 1Co 1:10 strongly suggest just the opposite: that
differences of opinion and internal schisms already existed in Corinth, and
whilst not approved, were at the least preferable to out-and-out division. For
Paul to say 'Brethren, we must agree' is certainly not the same as saying 'We
must excommunicate all those who do not agree.' Paul was far from being a
Pope!
Such fallacious reasoning reminds us of what we might call the
"divorce syndrome". To wit: 'Paul says our marriage must conform to the divine
ideal. Since it does not, then it is not a proper marriage. Therefore we will
divorce and each seek another marriage that will reflect the perfect ideal.'
Such an attitude, we trust, will be seen by all to be hopelessly unrealistic.
Who can fail to see that the divine ideal of marriage is something to be sought
by all husbands and wives, as they seek to overcome their failures and press on
toward the mark? Why cannot we all see, also, that this is the proper attitude
toward that "marriage" of brethren in the ecclesia? Why must we demand
"perfection of fellowship" as the price of unity when experience sadly shows us
that nothing else in this life is ever perfect? Why cannot we learn to conquer
petty differences and put up with relatively trivial abrasions on our way to
achieving a closer approximation of the divine ideal? This is all that Christ --
and Paul -- would have us to do.
In the first-century ecclesias some were "unskillful" while
others were able to partake of "strong meat" (Heb 5:11-14). Some were "babes"
while others were "fathers". Some were "yet carnal" (1Co 3:3) while others
possessed high degrees of spirituality. And it is the same today. In the
absolute sense, then, it is impossible that all brethren have "the same mind and
the same judgment". Some will always be more advanced than others, and some will
always present problems to the rest. True fellowship, like true freedom, does
not consist in a rigid like-mindedness on all things -- that is an impossible
wish! True fellowship and true freedom does consist in the limited toleration of
differences, allowing scope for development in the truth at an individual pace,
while the strong patiently help rather than criticize and condemn the
weak.
"It must be confessed that divisions oftentimes take place which could be
avoided without prejudicing the truth in any way. A little more patience, a
little more kindness, a little less sense of personal pride and self-importance,
a little more discrimination between essential and non-essential elements of
belief -- How many a division would thus have been avoided! To create a division
would appear to be considered by some as a very meritorious act, and a proof of
zeal and stability in the truth, whereas it often arises that it is a proof of
pride, bitterness, and a wayward determination to get one's way at any cost. The
truth is that the making of divisions has become far too easy a process, and the
time has come when a little resistance should be made to the disintegrating
spirit in our midst; and which, if allowed to go unchecked, will work disaster
and split the brotherhood into useless shreds... These little ecclesias of ours
up and down the land are worth keeping; and any needless disruptive tendency
must be strongly resisted" (D Hughes, Xd
40:203,204).
The way to achieve "the same mind" is not to divide from those
of a different mind, but as the apostles say, to be condescending,
compassionate, and humble. Have we as a brotherhood sincerely and in a
wholehearted manner sought this peace and unity? Or have we too often, for the
most personal and self-serving of motives, undermined the ecclesial good in the
perpetuation of controversies of quite secondary importance? The article quoted
above, written in 1903, concludes with some words of almost prophetic import:
"If we go on everlastingly agitating on unimportant points, everlastingly
dividing and subdividing, the superstructure of the truth, which it has cost so
much to re-erect in these latter years, will crumble away and leave behind an
irreparable loss. 'Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to
destruction, and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand'
(Mat 12:25; Luk 11:17)."
*****
Other Bible passages re "one mind":
- Uses of "homothumadon": Act 1:14; 2:1; 2:46; 4:24; 5:12; 8:6; 15:25; Rom
15:6.
- United in one mind: 1Co 1:10.
- Like-minded: Phi 2:2,3.
- Be
subject to one another: Rom 12:16; 2Co 13:11; Eph 5:21; 1Pe 3:8;
5:5.
