The Relationship of a Local Congregation to Those Congregations of Christians in Error

The Relationship of a Local Congregation to Those Congregations of Christians in Error THE RELATIONSHIP OF A LOCAL CONGREGATION
TO THOSE CONGREGATIONS GF CHRISTIANS IN ERROR
By Harvey Scott In the speech preceding this one you were told of the relationship of the local congregation to other congregations in full fellowship. This speech had to do with tho relationship between two or more congre-gations who are alike in origin, doctrine, and practice, and at the same time following the principle of “where the Bible speaks we will speak; where the Bible is silent, we will be silent.” This makes the New Testament their only rule of faith and practice.

“My theme has to do with the “relationship of these local congregations to congregations of Christians in error.” The congregations sustaining this relationship we are now discussing will of necessity be alike and Scriptural in origin for neither of them could be Christian in any other way. Any congregation of people originating in a way foreign to the teaching of the New Testament cannot be a congregation of Christians. The very wording of the theme that has been given to me to discuss declares that there is a difference between these two groups. One of them is a group of Christians in error- -whatever that error is—and the other one is a congregation of Christians not in error. But what does it take to constitute a congregation of Christians in error, is a question that should be given some consideration. Will just any kind of strife or confusion within the congregation be sufficient to classify it as a congregation of Christians in error? How much error, or what kind of error must be found in a congregation before it can be reforred to as a group of Christians m error? Remember that this group is not in error as to its origin, for in that case it would not be a congregation of Christians.

It must be that this group is in error either in doctrine or in practice or in both, But who of us wall be willing to affirm that even we, who claim to be true to God’s order, are a group of people that is free from error in cur practice. Since about ninety-five percent of the membership of the church are faithful in their attendance on Lord’s day for the worship, only about thirty-five percent of them are faithful in. the teaching work of the church. Is this sufficient to constitute us a congregation of Christians in error, or does it require more than this? I do not think that we can say that we are free from error with this situation as it is. A careful study of the first Corinthian letter will reveal that the church of God in Corinth had within that congregation a number of outstanding sins. Was this a “congregation of Christians in error”? Again I ask the question, What does it take to constitute a congregation of Christians in error? This sentence is paradoxical to me. For a congregation to do that which causes it to lose its identity as a congregation of our Lord: to me it has done that which has caused it to lose its identity as a congregation of Christians. They may be still children of God who are disobedient, but I cannot understand how they can still be Christians. But the theme calls for a discussion of the question of our attitude toward those congregations of Christians in error.

It therefore must refer to that group of people who, although they are Scriptural in origin, are in error because of their teaching and practice. Concerning such people John has this to say: “Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ, hath not God: he that abideth in
the teaching, the same hath both the Father and the Son. If any one cometh unto you, and bringeth not this teaching, receive him not into your house, and give him no greeting: for he that giveth him greet ing partaketh in In's evil works” (2 John 1:9). While it is true that John is talking about individuals, the ad-monition will apply to congregations since they go on-ward and abide not in the teaching of Christ. In that case they have not God, and we should not give them an opportunity to lead others astray with their false teaching. Neither should we give to them any words of encouragement in their procedure, for to do so would be partaking of their evil works. To any congregation of Christians, therefore, we should give no word of encouragement in their under-takings or give to them any opportunity to teach their false doctrine to those with’n our group. “Receive them not into your house” is the language of John— permit them not into your assembly to promulgate their teaching. Thus we can see that one relationship of the local congregation to those congregations of Christians m error is to offer no encouragement to them m theii errors or give to them no opportunity to promulgate their false teaching. To offer this encouragement to them or to give them opportunities to teach their doctrine would be to be partakers of their evil works.

History reveals that the people of God have never been faithful very long at a time. This is true through all their history. The very wording of this theme assumes that a part of the people of God now are in an apostate state by asking what shall be the relationship, of those following God’s order, toward those Christians in error. This is neither a new nor a modern problem—a problem that for the first time is presented to this generation. It has its origin in the language of Cain: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” That question has been ringing in the ears of the people of God from that time until now. This same problem we are discussing now —the relationship of the people of God in full fellowship toward those in error—faced Judah in her relationship to her sister kingdom Israel. Although in final analysis Judah was in almost as much error as was the northern kingdom of Israel, yet she does not lose her identity in the captivity which follows as did Israel.

This was the problem of Nehemiah as he rebuilt Jerusalem when Sanballet, Tobiah, and Gesham pro-posed a compromise to him when they said:
“Come, let us meet together in one of the villages in the plain of Ono. But they thought to do mischief.” Nehemiah replied: “I am doing a great work, so that I cannot come down: why should the work cease, whilst I leave it, and come down to you?” (Nehemiah 6:1-5). When those who have departed from God’s order in their doctrine and practice see their mistake and want to take counsel with those who still cling to God’s order, with a view of coming back to that way them-selves, then mutual counsel will be in order; but when it becomes a compromised proposition which asks men to turn from God’s order of doctrine and practice and to accept a way outlined by man, it should be respectfully and resolutely denied.

I would therefore suggest that our relationship to a congregation of Christians in error is not to form any compromise with them but to make an honest effort to get them to see the error of their way and to return to the way of the Lord; for they have departed from the faith. We are doing a good work. Why should the work cease, whilst we leave it and come down to them. We have not time to meet with them in any kind of counsel where a compromise of some sort is to be proposed. If they wish to correct the error of their way, and come back to their first love, then a mutual counsel with them would be in order. We are not only not to fellowship them in their work, but we are not to make any kind of compromise with them in regard to the doctrine and practice of the Lord so as to bring about a reconciliation. This problem was bothering the early church as seen from the language of the apostle Paul in Romans 16:17. “Now I beseech you brethren, mark them that are causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which ye learned: and turn away from them.” On this point, I give to you the following from the pen of Brother J. C. McQuiddy in the Gospel Advocate of November 3, 1921:

“Christians, before striving and contending with each other and before dividing up into parties and factions, should remember just what the church of Christ has cost God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. They should remember how great the sacrifices of a dying Savior to establish his church. They should not overlook the fact that Christ gave his body and shed his blood for his church. It is a greater sin for a man to rend the spiritual body of Jesus Christ than the man committed who pierced the side and drove the nails through the hands and feet of the Lord Jesus Christ. In the church is wrapped up the wisdom and love and power of God Almighty. What a fearful thing it is to destroy the unity of the Spirit, to rend the body of Christ, which the divine wisdom conceived, the di-vine love prompted, and the divine power executed." The esteem with which the body of Christ is held in many cases is entirely too low. Some (especially those Christians in error) think more of their human opinions, instrumental music, societies, future reign of Christ, or whatever it might be, than they do of the body of Christ and the sacredness of that great institution. These might be called the Christians in error if through the teaching and practice of these or other errors they are causing divisions and occasions of stumbling contrary to the doctrine of Christ. In that case we are commanded of the Lord to turn away from them. We may then cause the division rather than to accept and practice their errors. But this would be according to the doctrine of Christ. The Holy Spirit is specific in his teaching as to our treatment toward those who put their personal ambitions and interests above the body of our Lord Jesus Christ. Men who would make a party or a sect simply for the purpose of furthering their personal ambitions “are schismatics and should be so treated," is the language of Brother McQuiddy in the Advocate. The Holy Spirit says through Paul, “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them that are causing divisions and occasions of stumbling contrary to the doctrine which ye learned: and turn away from them” (Romans 16:17).

Those from whom we are commanded to turn away are those who are causing divisions and occasions of stumbling contrary to the doctrine of Christ. Christ teaches that his followers are to be humble, to be meek and long-suffering, and to be free from the love of money and selfish interests. But those who put them-selves above the body of Christ are entirely out of har-mony with the religion of our Lord. This must include the congregations of Christians in error. We are therefore admonished of the Lord to turn away from them. Instead of seeking to gratify our personal ambitions, we should listen to the admonition of Paul:

“Doing nothing through faction or through vainglory, but in lowliness of mind each counting' other better than himself: not looking each of you to his own things, but each of you also to the things of others. Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross. Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name; that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow of things in heaven and things on the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Php_2:3-11). The man who is not willing in meekness and humility to hold fast the form of sound words is not in the mind of Christ: for, “If any man teacheth a different doctrine, and consenteth not to sound words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; he is puffed up, knowing nothing, but doting about questionings and disputes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, wranglings of men corrupted in mind and bereft of the truth, supposing that godliness is a way of gain” (1 Timothy 6:3-5). In our relationship toward those congregations of Christians in error we are not to indorse or to encourage them in their unscriptural teaching and practice lest we become partakers of their “evil works.” But we are to teach, admonish, and exhort them to turn from the error of their way and accept the order of God in all they teach and do. That we should be interested in them and attempt to save them from their error, we have the example of our Lord in three illustrations as he answered those who opposed him as to why he associated with publicans and sinners.

1. At Matthew’s feast as recorded in Matthew 9:10-12 we have this:
“And it came to pass, as they sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with Jesus and his disciples. And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Teacher with the publicans and sinners? Which when he heard it, he said, They that are whole have no need of a physician, but they that are sick. Go ye and learn what this meaneth, I desire mercy, and not sacrifice: for I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” In other words, Jesus said that “I am a physician, and where would you ex-pect to find me but among my patients?”

2. “The second occurs in the house of Simon the Pharisee as recorded in Luke 7:36-39 :
“And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he entered into the Pharisee’s house, and sat down to meat. And behold, a woman who was in the city, a sinner; and when she knew that he was sitting at meat in the Pharisee’s house, she brought an alabaster cruse of ointment, and standing behind at his feet, weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment. Now when the Pharisee that had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have perceived who and what manner of woman this is that touched him, that she is a sinner.” The answer that follows from Jesus to this meditated procedure is to the effect that it is a good policy to be a friend to sinners who have much to be forgiven; for when they have been forgiven and restored to their Lord their love is greater than their sins. Behold the woman, weeping for sorrow as well as for joy, washes his feet with her tears and wipes them with her hair. And thus he tells Simon, “you did not shew me this kind of treatment.”

3. The third is the circumstance of the great charge of the scribes and Pharisees that he receiveth sinners,
and eateth with them. We read:
“And both the scribes and the Pharisees murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them. And he spake unto them this parable saying, What man of you, having a hundred sheep, and having lost one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it? And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and his neighbors, saying unto them, Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which was lost. I say unto you, that even so there shall be joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine righteous persons, who need no repentance” (Luke 15:2-7).

Thus Jesus said the reason that he received and ate with sinners was that by that means he might obtain their restoration into the fold of God. It was the same reason that moved the shepherd to leave the ninety and nine and hunt for the one that had gone astray. Someone has said, “there is more joy in this world in finding the things that are lost than in the possessing of those things that have not been lost.” Jesus said there was more joy in heaven “over one sinner that repenteth, than over the ninety and nine who need no repentance.”

I am wondering now as I close this study of the “relationship of the local congregation to those congregations of Christians in error,” if some of us might not more often leave the ninety and nine who are safe in the fold and hunt for the one that has gone astray until we find it and placing it on our shoulder bring it home? With this true story of a wandering child I close:

“Mr. and Mrs. Spraggins settled in Comanche county, then a border region, early in the ’70’s and from a Comanche paper dated October 18, 1879, we copy the following pathetic story of the lost child.

“The most pitiful and heartrending affair that has occurred in this county took place last week several miles south of town on the Bushy Gap road. On Wed-nesday morning (October 8, 1879) Mrs. Spraggins went to the spring several hundred yards distant, leaving her little child, only 21 months old, at the house. Upon her return to the house she missed the child and could not find it. She searched everywhere but in vain. The neighborhood was aroused, and fact was soon made evident by the little footprints in the path that the child had attempted to follow the mother to the spring and had become bewildered and lost. The whole neighborhood became aroused and a thorough search commenced. Again was the trail lost and found and every moment they expected to find the little fugitive but were doomed to disappointment. Night fell over the scene, and the last sign of the child was found four miles from home. By this time the mother had become frantic with grief, and her agony was heart rending. At night fires were built and at early dawn the search was resumed with renewed vigor. The morning passed and the sun hung low in the west, but no new signs of the child were discovered. A messenger was sent to town for reinforcements. Some fifty or sixty men appeared on the scene. A search was kept up all night by means of numerous lanterns, but the same fruitless result. But the next morning (Friday) some three hundred resolute men had gathered and a single line was formed nearly a mile in length and all day long the country was scoured everywhere it was in the bounds of reason to suppose that the child had wandered. ‘Hope deferred maketh the heart sick,’ and many gave up all hope of finding the child alive. Many supposed it had fallen prey to the numerous wolves, bears, and cougers which abound in that country, and were about to give up the search when a piece of its dress was found hanging to a bush, far up the side of a rugged mountain, and fully five miles from home. This gave the weary hunters new encouragement and vigor. But again darkness interferred and the men camped in small groups all over the country. One man lay in twenty feet of the child’s dead body, where early the next morning (Saturday) it was found dead on the mountain side. The body was found lying dead on its face, and a bush was caught in the back of its dress. Its little feet were swollen to twice their normal size. Thorns had pierced its body, and its breast, face and legs were literally scratched to pieces. No one can know or even imagine the suffering and misery the little wanderer endured. The child had been walking but four months. It would appear impossible to the casual observer for a child to travel over the rough mountains and through thickets five miles from home as this one did. Death, no doubt, was a sweet relief to the little wanderer’s terrible suffering” (Bandera Era May 24, 1923). No one will ever know the suffering on the part of the child and especially of the mother. But what about the suffering in heaven over those “congregations of Christians in error”? Are we as willing to bring them home as these good people were to bring this child home? But he could not find the way back home. Neither can many of these people in these congregations who are in error today. Brethren: Are we selfish, are we interested, do we love those in error? I know, some will not come. But does that excuse us?