Christian Unity—R. D. Smith

Christian Unity—R. D. Smith CHRISTIAN UNITY
By R. D. Smith
Ephesians 4:1-3.

Christian unity is a state of oneness, harmony or agreement among Christians. It is the absence of division and strife; and the thing for which Jesus so earnestly prayed; and which Paul besought the Corinthians to observe.

Let us eliminate whatever is not relevant to the phase of this, question I have chosen to discuss; and proceed to the real issue, that we may not waste time. There is not a question as to the importance of Christian unity. We are perfectly agreed that the word of God should be the basis or standard of faith and practice in order to unity. But so far we have failed to attain this greatly desired and much talked of s.tate or condition.

It must be clear to all thinking brethren that in spite of the aforementioned points of agreement, we can never have perfect unity without uniform interpretation of the rule of faith and practice. It is said that the Civil War was fought on account of the principle here involved. North and South had agreed to the union and had accepted the Constitution as the basis; but failing to interpret uniformly, brought on that bloody war. In like manner, failing to interpret the rule of faith and practice uniformly, we have had division and strife among us for the whole duration of our existence, since the beginning of the restoration movement; and it continues unabated. But you will no doubt say to me, If we would speak only where the Bible speaks and be silent where the Bible is silent, all division would immediately cease and unity prevail. There is no doubt of it; but we have not yet been able to agree as to what the Bible speaks and where it is silent, in- so many instances. Should you ask for examples, you are referred to our religious paoers and to the many and constant controversies raging in these, revealmg in some instances as many as three or four positions held by brethren on a single Scriptural question. Is this unity ? We need not try to deceive ourselves and fool others; for we simply do not have it.

Ours is a golden motto. Speak where the Bible speaks and be silent where the Bible is silent, is a perfect formula; and would mean immediate and perfect unity. But who is doing it? If we speak different doctrines, somebody is wrong. Who speaks where the Bible speaks? Which of the diffeiing brethren? It therefore becomes a question as to how to carry out our motto and apply our formula. If we all could recognize a supreme council or tribunal to which we might refer all matters for adjudication, letting this tribunal decide for us what we should believe, preach and practice; and abide this decision, we would all speak the same things. But a casual observation of such a system, once adopted, convinces one of its absolute failure, much less its unscripturalness. We repeat to you this story in the fewest possible words.

After the death of the apostles, the church found herself troubled on account of the teaching of conflicting doctrines. We are told that the controversy waxed hot, like unto ours in these days; but for a time they seemed to find no solution. But as time went on there was evolved a system that worked perfectly and enabled them to stop the. heretics and end their false teachings. The historians tell us that in order to put down heresy, punish heretics and to preserve the unity and purity of the church, the presbyters or bishops adopted the doctrine of apostolic succession. They meant by apostolic succession, and so taught, that God sent Christ with all power to act for him; that Christ sent the apostles or bishops appointing them as their successors, with all power to act for them; that these presbyters or bishops transmitted this power to other presbyters or bishops before their death and thus, it was that bishops or presbyters became the direct successors of the apostles, which made them the successors to Christ and God. Thus presbyters or, bishops, claimed divine right to rule the church; and to expel false teachers without let or hindrance; and that they alone might exercise this power. The historian calls this step, the Ascendency of the Presbyters, or Bishops; and designates it as their first departure from apostolic simplicity. The first and colossal error, i. e. according presbyters or bishops apostolic succession, with apostolic powers and prerogatives, with the right to be and act as the very vicars of God and Christ, infallible and irreprehen- sible, leaves the church helpless and prostrate, with these men to lead them like sheep to the slaughter, which they did not hesitate to do swiftly and surely.

They were now Romeward bound never to stop till they reached the City of The Seven Hills.

Thus with this first error established they move with steady progress from one step to another ever tending to that certain tragic end, the complete apostasy of the church. With all authority in the hands of the presb.v ters,, elders, or bishops of the local church, soon one of their number is presiding elder and soon the presiding elder or bishop. Behold, says the historian, The Monarchal Bishop, over the local congregation. With all authority in his hands the local bishop joins other like bishops of local churches in a certain territory at the synod, where one of their number presides and soon becomes the presiding elder or bishop of that district; and we have the parochial system. The synod grows in popularity and quickly extends it bounds taking in a larger territory. The bishop of tne metropolis presides being made bishop of the realm. See the Metropolitan System! Continuing to enlarge the unit of government and to reduce the number of rulers, we have the Archbishop with his Archbishopric. But the struggle for power is not ended. The unit of government is again en-larged by slicing the world mto five grand divisions; and enthroning a religious ruler over each with absolute authority over his realm. He was styled The Patriarch and his domain The Patriarchate. The system, The Patriarchate. Yet the rulers are not satisfied with the size of their domains and at once begin a death struggle for more power. After a bitter contest the Patriarchs of Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria fell out of the fight, leaving Rome and Constantinople to fight it out. It was war to the knife and knife to the hilt; but when the smoke of battle cleared away, the Patriarch of Constantinople was hors de combat and the Patriarch of Rome was crowned king of the spiritual world, elevated to a throne under the imposing title, Universal Patriarch, papa or pope, in the year A. D. 606. He did not only claim authority to rule the universal church; but that all temporal rulers were to subject themselves to his, authority with all of their subjects. Once a plain humble presbyter or elder, he has grown to these enormous proportions. All of this under the claim of apostolic successjon; and the plea of preserving the Unity and the purity of the church. ApostoLc succession, the worst of heresies; the motive for its adoption, the colossal subterfuge. Thus an example of man’s rulership over the church,,

Let me say here that I have every respect for the splendid men who have striven to fit themselves by experience and study and discipline, as per Paul’s letters to Timothy and Titus, for the work of overseeing. But as for those who delegate to themselves the prerogative of rulership over their brethren, their claims are hereby challenged. Brethren, I have come to tell you the truth, if I never speak again. There is not the least warrant in the Scriptures for the rulership of elders, or of any other persons, over the church of God, beyond the power and influence of teaching the word of God, exhorting and persuading and the example of a holy life.

I am prepared to affirm that the church is to be ruled or governed by the word of God, through the influence of teaching, exhorting, persuading and the example of right living. I will deny that this is exclusively the work of elders in any sense. I will deny that the vessel bearing the word constitutes the binding power of the word. I will affirm that the word of God must rule; and that unity, to be Christian unity, must be based on this.

Since Christianity is a system of faith it is obvious that no sort of compulsion, beyond that of conviction, is permissible in this province. Unity is agreement, concord, harmony; and in the very nature of things can never be a matter of command. It is to be brought about through the intelligence, by a logical course of procedure. That is by mutual study and investigation; and, to be successful, must be as per Paul’s admonition to the Ephesians; i. e. “With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; Endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” The manner and spirit of our discussions has greatly hindered our efforts at unity. Let us heed Paul’s admonition for there is no excuse for the bitterness that attends our investigations.

After forty years of preaching I do not recall that there has ever been a proper discussion of this vital question. True there has been much said on related phases of it; but I think that never once have we started at the right place and proceeded orderly to find the answer to the question: How Is the Church To Be Ruled or Governed? I am anxious to hear such discussion that I may be sure of the truth; and I suggest that s,ome of you able brethren engage in a public oral discussion, in a brotherly spirit, that the matter may be clarified.