by Mike Willis

I would like to express my appreciation to John Gentry for choosing the topics and the writers for this special issue of Truth Magazine.

From the beginning of the nineteenth century restoration movement, unity has been on the hearts of Christians in America. They were always troubled by the denominational divisions among Christians. The restorationist solution to denominational division was unity through the restoration of the ancient order. Thomas Campbell wrote in the Declaration and Address as follows:

But this we do sincerely declare, that there is nothing we have hitherto received as matter of faith or practice, which is not expressly taught and enjoined in the word of God, either in express terms, or approved precedent, that we would not heartily relinquish, that so we might return to the original constitutional unity of the christian church (Declaration and Address, 10-11).

These men took seriously Jesus’ prayer for unity among His disciples (John 17:20-21) and the condemnation in Scripture of religious divisions (1 Cor. 1:10-13; 11:18; 3:4; 2 Cor. 11:3-4; Rom. 16:17; Acts 15:1; 2 Tim. 3:5). They thought that unity among God’s people could be attained and maintained by the restoration of the ancient order.

James Mathes wrote,

If all would consent to give up their human isms that now divide them, we should come together in happy union upon God’s own foundation. . . . I, therefore, propose the “Bible - the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible” as the platform and bond of union. In making this proposition, I offer a platform, that you all acknowledge the best one on earth; nay, the only one that is infallible. . . .  In accepting it, no one is called upon to make more sacrifice than others. All are required to sacrifice their human isms, and those party names and sectarian peculiarities, which distinguish one sect from another, and all are required to take the word of God alone as the rule of their lives (The Western Preacher, 145, 150).

The Scriptures teach that “There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all” (Eph. 4:4-6). The same message of Christ should be preached in all of the churches (1 Cor. 4:17). The apostles exhorted preachers to preach the word that they had received from the apostles (2 Tim. 2:2). The restoration solution is not attractive to many denominational folks who were more wedded to their creeds and denominational positions and practices than they were to Christ. Within the restoration movement itself, a second generation demonstrated that they were more wedded to their missionary society and mechanical instruments of music in worship than they were to maintaining the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. The threw aside the restoration principle as a means of attaining and maintaining unity among Christ’s disciples.
The restoration principle was replaced by ecumenism, as men lost faith in the restoration plea, thinking that the plea itself led to division. Alfred T. DeGroot wrote, “...we may conclude that the more specifically the restoration plea has been defined in terms of governmental, organizational, and ritualistic patterns of behavior, the less success it has had as an effective and cohesive force in the Christian world” (The Restoration Principle, 160).

Turning aside from the restoration principle, many followed the denominational model of the ecumenical movement. The ecumenical approach to unity teaches that almost all Christian churches agree on the core doctrines of Christianity (this certainly is far from the truth at the beginning of the twenty-first century) but have their individual denominational dogmas, fellowships, and organizations. The body of Christians should acknowledge that there are Christians in all denominations based on their common understanding of the core body of beliefs; they should agree to disagree on their peculiar denominational beliefs and practices. The position was defended on the basis of a gospel/doctrine distinction that some thought could be justified in Scripture (see C.H. Dodd’s [1884-1973] book, The Apostolic Preaching and Its Development, in which he urged that a firm distinction be made between gospel and doctrine). Denominationalism followed the ecumenical efforts to practice unity in doctrinal diversity with other Christian denominations; the ecumenical movement, however,  was not an interfaith movement that sought a means of achieving religious unity with non-Christian religions. The achievement of the ecumenical movement was that most denominations became accepting of one another – they recognized as Christians those in Christian fellowships outside their own.

However, the principles of ecumenism eroded faith in Christ. The very same arguments that allow unity in spite of doctrinal differences led these “Christians” to become tolerant of differences in gospel, what they labeled as the core teachings about Jesus. As modernism advanced, denominational pastors gave up belief in the miracles of the Bible and the inspiration of Scripture. These “Christians” leaders perceived that they were just as disagreed about such core gospel issues as the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and whether or not one could be saved without saving faith in Jesus Christ as they were about the peculiar denominational doctrines of each sect. Soon Christian denominations began reaching out in “dialogue” with those in non-Christian religions and began to accept those in non-Christian religions, just the same as they accepted those in Christian denominations with whom they disagreed.

Those in the Christian Churches who had rejected the restoration movement because it led to divisive soon found themselves dividing. The Disciples of Christ moved into the mainstream of Protestant denominationalism (which denied the inspiration of the Scriptures and the miracles of Jesus), whereas the Independent Christian Churches still adhered to the inspiration of Scripture, although they long ago had decided that they were “Christians only, but not the only Christians.” After setting aside the restoration plea as a means of attaining and maintaining Christian unity because it was too divisive, they experienced a major division among themselves; rejecting the restoration plea did not prevent the Christian Churches/Disciples of Christ from dividing.

The purpose of this series of articles is to remind ourselves that unity among the disciples of Christ can still be attained and maintained through adherence to our common Lord Jesus Christ. One must recognize, however, that the Lord Jesus’ plan for unity is also a plan for division. There is no unity between those who adhere to the Lordship of Jesus Christ and those who reject Him as their Lord – whether that rejection focuses on repudiation of Jesus’ teaching on what one must do to be saved or how men ought to worship God. The words of Jesus in Luke 6:46, “But why do you call Me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do the things which I say?” focus attention upon what brings and keeps one in fellowship with Christ and His people – obedience to the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ. Those who chose to go beyond the teaching of Jesus Christ prevent those who follow their teaching from entering into fellowship with Christ and His people and break that fellowship with those who are disciples of Jesus Christ when they depart from His word. The Lord Himself defined who is in and who is out of Christian fellowship and shows why that occurs – obedience or disobedience to the commandments of Christ.

Can we be satisfied with the boundaries of fellowship which Jesus Himself established?