Truth Magazine

By Jeffery Kingry

“The Communists do not need to ‘bury’ us. All they need do is wait a few years and they can have the U.S.A. without firing a shot.”

“The view that the U.S.A. is a democratic, representative republic is a farce. The controlling party in the U.S. is the military-industrial lobby.”

“Less is more! Big government now controls almost every facet of our daily lives, and it controls more and more as the bureaucracy grows.”

“The control of our media is in the hands of a few establishment liberals. They control all the news and most of the printed page and use their control to propagandize the American people.”

Remarks such as these are not original, but reflect the fear of many people who live in America that this country will ultimately become totalitarian. Totalitarian government is controlled by one political party usually directed by a dictator. The governing party supports only orthodox party ideology and tolerates no rival views or convictions. The Soviet Union, Peoples Republic of China, and Fascist Spain are modern examples of totalitarian regimes. A totalitarian government can be either “left wing” (usually socialistic, radical, desiring reform through revolution, advocating greater well-being of the common man as opposed to existing forms. Examples: Soviet Union, China, Cuba.) or “right wing” (conservative, opposing change in the established order. Favoring traditional attitudes and practices. Usually advocating forced establishment of an authoritarian political order. Examples: Franco’s Spain, Fascist Italy and Germany.)

Factors in the Rise of Totalitarianism

History has shown that there are usually three basic factors involved in a totalitarian takeover: (1) A political party espousing a totalitarian ideology. (2) Social and political turmoil or dissatisfaction which enables the totalitarian group to gain control (3) Circumstances which make possible continued control by the totalitarian party.

Historically totalitarian parties have taken control of government. Seldom if ever have they been voted into control. In almost every case social disorder, public political apathy, and lack of character of those in office has provided opportunity for the overthrow of those in power. Once in power the party completely dominated politics, controlled the media and communications, commanded the military and police, and controlled public thinking and obedience through terrorism. Totalitarian leaders have often displayed vicious personal traits: sadistic, secretive, contemptuous of law, and inflexible, imprisoning or annihilating those who oppose them. They often either use religion to support their regimes, or if there is too much character in religious men, they oppose religion.

The situations that enable totalitarian parties opportunity to seize power have varied from country to country, but generally falls into just a few categories. Fear of enemies has driven nations to accept a totalitarian regime in hope of added security. Nazi Germany rose to power from the fears of the German nation of rising communism. Threats from without drive many Americans to totalitarian concepts because of fear. Communist victories abroad, the weakness and wavering of our allies, the impotence of our defense allies, the compromise of our foreign policy, the growing military superiority of the communist world combined seems to justify concentration of power and reduction of freedom. Fearful people will purchase security even at the cost of personal liberty. Internal disorder has frequently set the stage for a totalitarian takeover. Political and social corruption, economic collapse, widespread unemployment, social class struggle, breakdown of law and order, rapid social change, and family breakdown, cause people to demand peace and security. The party that promises to restore order is apt to be swept into power despite totalitarian ideology. Order is often preferred to freedom when Anarchy threatens. Declining religious morality paves the way for totalitarianism. When personal character, honesty, morality, vigor, faith and discipline crumbles and dissolves, people turn to a substitute. The substitute pseudo-religious movements like nationalism, fascism, communism take the place of personal religious integrity. In America we have seen the rise of the pseudoreligions of ecumenism, nonsectarianism, anticommunist, Americanism, or “social reform” through denominationalism. It is not difficult to replace Biblical conviction and personal faith in God with “party” ideology and action. It is interesting to note that totalitarian governments either use religion or oppose it. If religion cannot be used to endorse the government’s actions and policies, then it is opposed as an enemy of the people and the welfare of the state.

After a party comes to power, it must control the people in order to remain in power. Modern totalitarian regimes have and use large central governments with huge armies and police forces, media control, and technology to maintain control of the people. The expanded size and power of the Federal government has always been a potential threat to freedom. The “founding fathers” certainly recognized this when they drafted our Constitution. Power was divided and diluted in three branches of government, each with its own sphere of authority. All powers not specifically granted the central government by the constitution were to remain in the hands of each sovereign state. This concept of “states rights” has fallen on hard times. Today the expression is generally a term of derision identified only with racial bigots, political losers, and right wing visionaries. Our strong central government has made diffusion of power and government among the people an antique concept.

But, it is true that through social welfare programs, Social Security, military contracts, educational and scientific subsidation through grants, civil rights control, taxes, regulatory agencies, law enforcement and intelligence agencies, revenue sharing and conditional state grants and loans, the government controls the lives of almost all of its citizens.

What to Do?

How does the Christian deal with these very real social and political forces in his life that point to totalitarianism? First of all we need to realize the inherent evils of totalitarianism. It curtails individual freedom and hardens human sensitivity. It becomes a blasphemous pseudo-religion that requires unquestioned support and demands absolute loyalty. It is a trial and a burden on any society, and ultimately reaches a point where its sole existence is to secure its own invulnerability. It thwarts efforts to discover truth, and stifles creativity. It will ultimately oppose and attempt to crush all that opposes its excesses. The Christian needs to oppose totalitarianism wherever it is found because of the hurt it brings to human life (Luke 13:32-35).

As a citizen the Christian can demand the enforcement and respect of our constitution by government. Experience in history demonstrates that laws and constitutions, however hoary and ,hallowed, are worthless scraps of paper unless kept and enforced by the government. Our republic has a system of checks and balances designed to operate as they did recently in the removal of Richard Nixon from his office. We must scrupulously preserve these concepts in our government. (When President Ford said to the Congress, “I do not want a honeymoon, I want a marriage,” we accomodatively know what he meant, but for our sake and the Constitution’s, the two branches of government must remain adversaries).

But, as Christians we cannot seek to change the world through political ends. The child of God recognizes that all power in heaven and in earth is in the hands of Jesus Christ (Matt. 28:18; Rom. 13:1; Eph. 1:20,21). By living righteously and following Christ’s example even in the face of totalitarianism God can work through us to change man and the world he lives in (Mk. 10:42-45; Rom. 15:2-7). The Christian must also realize that he lives in the world. There will never be a Shangrila on earth, an ultimate socialist state, or capitalistic technological utopia. There will be nations rising and falling till the end of time. The U.S. and the present world system is a thing of flux and change. Our government is not here below, but in the Kingdom of God. The message of John’s Revelation is that while the beast of political power (Rev. 17:3, 9-17), or the whore of religious apostate power (17:4-6, 18; 18:1-10) may overcome for the moment and shed the blood of the saints, persecute and seduce God’s people, ultimately God will be victorious. “The lamb shall overcome them: For he is Lord of lords and King of kings: And they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful” (Rev. 17:14).

Jesus, His apostles, and His church lived, died, and remained victorious under the most despotic, corrupt, and long lived totalitarian regimes that has ever existed on earth. The social peace and order brought about by its despotism provided the church opportunity to grow and prosper. It was that same benign totalitarianism that turned rapidly against the church and pursued it, drunk with the blood of the saints, for two hundred years. God’s people did not perish from the face of the earth, but were made strong in adversity. God’s apostle said, “We know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are called according to his promise. . .what shall we say then to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not his own soil, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? . . . who shall seperate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? . . . Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 8:28-39).

Conclusion

Brethren, our faith stands not in government good or evil, neither in armaments, nor bombs, nor armies, nor flags, nor political processes, nor constitutions of men. We stand in the Kingdom of God, a relationship of care and salvation; no despotism modern or ancient can take from us. Our prayers are the most potent power on the face of this earth, for we have the ear of God. For this reason “I exhort therefore that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men; For kings and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our saviour: who will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:1-4).

Truth Magazine XXI: 39, pp. 619-620
October 6, 1977

By Luther Blackmon

“Anti the peace of God which passeth all understanding shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus” (Phil. 4:7).

I like to lie in bed on stormy nights and listen to the rain beat on the roof and the wind moan through the trees outside. I think the reason I like this is because it gives me a feeling of security, or safety, to be protected from the elements. But this same storm that gives me a feeling of satisfaction and well-being may mean the death of another man somewhere. In like manner, the same tensions, heartaches, hardships, vicissitudes and uncertainties of life that are driving millions to seek escape in alcohol, dope, and the marts of sinful pleasure, are bringing others closer to God. When the pressures of living in this modern world are too much for the flesh alone, the faithful Christian finds a refuge in the promises of God. “Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart and ye shall find rest unto your souls, for my yoke is easy and my burden is light.” “But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness and all these things (material), shall be added unto you” (Mt. 6:33; 11:26-28).

Many millions of dollars are being spent every year to maintain some semblance of peace in this turbulent world. In my humble opinion, the time is not far distant when the world will be thrown into a holocaust that will destroy civilization (?) as we know it. My reasons for this opinion are two: (1) From the human side strictly, it seems to me that two ideologies as antagonistic as those represented by the United States and Soviet Russia cannot long survive together in a peaceful world. Somebody is bound to get trigger happy one of these days and set the fuse. It just isn’t human to have a new gun and not want to shoot it, and both sides are armed with every means of destruction that human wisdom has invented. (2) Looking through the eyes of the Old Testament prophets as they pronounced the everlasting doom of such ancient nations as Egypt, Syria, Assyria, Babylon, and the Northern Kingdom of Israel because of their sins, it seems unlikely that He will continue to put up with this vaunted display of human wisdom and idolatrous worship of man’s achievements, to say nothing of the blasphemous disregard for decency and righteousness. And that is causing the nations to rot inside.

But whether he lives in quiet surroundings or in circumstances that strike fear into the hearts of brave men, the faithful child of God will have an inward peace that the world, and the half-hearted Christian can neither have nor understand. He is not terrified by the thought that the Russians might drop a bomb and destroy the city where he lives. If his doctor should tell him today he has but a few months to live, after the shock of the news has passed, he would face it as calmly as one “who wraps the drapery of his couch about him and lies down to pleasant dreams.” He likes to live, but he is prepared to die. And whether in life or death, he will glorify God. Whether in sickness or in health, in poverty or in wealth, whether his time be months or many years, he will be grateful and will use it as a sacred trust. In this man’s heart will abide the “peace of God that passeth understanding.”

But this kind of peace does not come to the Christian who is so busy in the pursuit of things that his heart has become a spiritual refrigerator, and the church is only a place where he comes for one hour each week to be served the Lord’s Supper. I wish some of the members of the church could be made to realize what a mistake they made when they traded the “peace of God” for a piece of the world that they cannot keep very long, and that will be burned up when the day of the Lord comes.

Truth Magazine XXI: 39, p. 618
October 6, 1977

By Norman E. Fultz

From a burning bush on Mt. Horeb at the backside of the desert where he was tending the sheep of his father-in-law, Moses was commissioned of God to return to Egypt and, in company with his brother Aaron, seek Pharaoh’s release of Israel. Pharaoh would harden his heart, affording the opportunity for great and convincing wonders to be performed. These wonders (better known to most as the ten plagues) would culminate in the death of Egypt’s first born ones; for the Lord considered Israel His first born, and He said, “Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy first born” (Ex. 4:23). The account of these wonders is found in Exodus seven through twelve. Finally, in anticipation of the last plague on Egypt, the Lord instructed Moses and Aaron regarding the “Lord’s Passover” and Israel’s release (read Ex. 12). In v. 42, the record says, “It is a night to be much observed unto the Lord for bringing them out from the land of Egypt: this is that night of the Lord to be observed of all the children of Israel in their generations.” In the future observances of this event, when the children would ask, “What mean ye by this service?”, they were to be taught its significance fully and clearly (cf. Ex. 12:26-27; 13:8, 14).

Israel’s Night To Be Much Observed

It is said to be “that night of the Lord . . . . ” What a marvelous display of God’s power against Egypt and of His grace toward Israel! He would triumph over Pharaoh’s callousness, and His wonders would be multiplied in the land of Egypt (11:9). It was to be observed by eating the Passover lamb.

To Be Observed By Whom?

Some were excluded–the stranger, foreigner, and hired servant; in fact, “no uncircumcised person shall eat .thereof” (Ex. 12:43-45, 48b). These would have lacked the knowledge of the event necessary to its meaningful observance. There would have been a lack of faith in its significance, and faith is the foundation of all acceptable service to God. And there would be a lack of personal interest. To Israel, it was a personal deliverance from many long years of bondage, but to the stranger it would mean nothing.

It was provided for Israel–“this is that night of the Lord to be observed of all the children of Israel in their generations” (v. 42b). Nor was it only a privilege; it was also a duty. “All the congregation of Israel shall keep (do, margin) it” (v. 47).

Time and Manner of Observance

The feast growing out of the events of this night which meant so much to Israel was to be kept with regularity–every year on the fourteenth day of the first month, Abib (Ex. 12:6; 13:4-5). Deep meaning was to characterize the observance. “And thou shalt shew thy son in that day, saying, This is done because of that which the Lord did unto me when I came forth out of Egypt” (Ex. 13:8). And in the next verse the writer shows it to be a memorial which should call forth respect for the Lord’s law.

A Night To Be Much Observed By Christians

We hasten to explain that we do not mean to infer that the feast of which we are now about to speak is a continuation of the Jewish Passover. It was, however, instituted at Jesus’ last observance of that feast (Lk. 22:15-18), and there are some points of comparison that can be made without straining. We speak of the Lord’s Supper which was instituted by Jesus at night–that night of His betrayal (1 Cor. 11:23).

By Whom To Be Observed?

The Lord’s statement of inclusion also excludes some. Since His table is in His kingdom, those riot in the kingdom are excluded from a truly beneficial observance of His Supper. In many instances, as outsiders, they are lacking in knowledge of its meaning and, thus, lack the faith which characterizes citizens of the kingdom. For to these latter ones, it is a communion of the body and of the blood of the Lord (1 Cor. l0:lb). Those not in the kingdom lack the personal interest which should characterize observers, having never been washed in the blood of the Lamb, nor translated into the kingdom (Col. 1:13-14).

Who are included? Jesus said, “And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Lk. 22:29-30). While the primary statement was to the apostles, Paul showed that the command to observe the Lord’s Supper extended to all those in the church (1 Cor. 11:17-34). And should it not be considered as more than a privilege? Though a privilege, it is to so remember the Lord. Is observance not a duty? The command is, “Take, eat” and “this do ye.” It is a matter of grave concern that many members of the body seemingly consider the Lord’s Supper so lightly. Company dropping in, the opportunity to make a overtime dollars, a fishing trip, or a golf game often takes precedence over this great memorial of the Lord’s sacrifice. Every child of God should consider it an event to be “much observed.”

Time and Manner Observance

Of the disciples in Troas, it is said, “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow . . . ” (Acts 20:7). They came together on the first day of the week. They broke bread. Every week has a first day. Christians, therefore, are to observe the Lord’s Supper every first day of the week.

We should endeavor to attach the deepest meaning to it, examining ourselves, discerning the Lord’s body, showing the Lord’s death till he comes (1 Cor. 11:26-29). It is a memorial of that great sacrifice of the Lord (v. 24-25). Let each one learn what it means, and when one’s children ask, “What mean ye by this?”, tell them plainly and clearly.

And should not the observance of this memorial, as Israel’s observance of the Passover, produce a great respect for the Lord’s law and a resultant desire to learn more of Him and a deeper commitment to serve Him faithfully? And should not each Christian, therefore, seek to be faithful in assembling every time possible to praise Him and to grow in His grace and knowledge? Truly, dear fellow Christian, the institution of the Lord’s Supper is a night to be much remembered in the kingdom.

Truth Magazine XXI: 39, pp. 617-618
October 6, 1977

By Ron Halbrook

No one desires unity with all men more than Christians do. But, we are not taught by God to seek unity with others on the basis of the lowest common denominator. Upon what basis shall we seek unity among religious people? Many concepts have been held through the centuries.

God’s way for unity is found in His Word. His Word reveals His thoughts and ways, which are far above man’s; it will accomplish His purpose, which also is far above man’s (Isa. 55:8-11). Man’s unity with God in past ages has depended upon man’s faithful obedience to the Word of God. Likewise, men have had unity with one another when they have obeyed God’s Word. In the Garden of Eden, God commanded Adam and Eve, “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Gen. 2:17). Disobedience separated man from God; Adam and Eve well understood this; for when they sinned and then “heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden,” they “hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God” (Gen. 3:8).

God gave Abraham the covenant of circumcision, commanding, “Every man child among you shall be circumcised” (Gen. 17:9-14). When Shechem and his people requested unity with God’s people, including the privilege of intermarriage, the sons of Jacob said, “If ye will be as we be, that every male of you be circumcised; then will we give our daughters unto you, and we will take your daughters to us, and we will dwell with you, and we will become one people” (Gen. 34:15-16). Though the offer of unity was insincere and deceitful, still the principle announced was valid. Being God’s people, being one people, involved the covenant of circumcision. Obedience to God’s Word was imperative under the Law of Moses for the unity of God’s people. The Lord told Moses to tell Israel, “Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: . . . and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation” (Ex. 19:5-6).

The unity of men with God and each other in this age of His grace depends upon faithful obedience to God’s Word. The New Testament provides for unity in Christ upon the basis of the Word of God. In His personal ministry, Jesus taught men to expect this. He said sheep must follow the voice of the shepherd exclusive of all other voices, and that those who would be in his family must “do the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Jn. 10:1-4; Matt. 12:46-49), Just before ending His personal ministry, Jesus prayed for the same unity. He prayed the apostles might be kept from evil through the Father’s name, that they might “be one,” that they might “have my joy,” that they might be sanctified. How was this to be done? “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word: that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me” (Jn. 17).

When Jesus Christ sat upon the throne at God’s right hand, He inaugurated this unity upon the Word of God. He sent the Spirit to proclaim, “God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized . . . . And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved” (Acts 2:36-47). All who obeyed the Word were added to the same thing, the same body, the same church-added together-UNITED. As Jesus Christ continued his reign, He taught Christians to maintain unity upon “the word of truth,” upon “the foundation,” in “the gospel,” and in “the unsearchable riches of Christ” (Eph. 1:13; 2:20; 3:8; 4:1-7). As various errors arose to challenge His supremacy, Christ continued to unfold the inspired message until it was completed, to supply our every need (2 Tim. 3:16-17). Upon the Word of God, God’s people can still have unity in Christ.

Man’s ways for unity supplant God’s way. But the ways which seem right to men are “the ways of death,” for “it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps” (Prov. 14:12; Jer. 10:23). Before the First Century ended, men were beginning to substitute their ways for God’s way. Paul warned the Ephesian elders that men would arise “speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them;” he exalted God’s Word as the only protection (Acts 20:29-32). Paul told the Thessalonians this spirit of lawlessness was already working-“for the mystery of iniquity doth already work”-and he assured the young preacher Timothy, “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils” (2 Thess. 2:7; 1 Tim. 4:1). The young preacher was urged to faithfully “preach the word,” “for the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Tim. 4:3-4). Similarly, Peter reminded the brethren, “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies” (2 Pet. 2:1).

What are some of the concepts of men substituted for the truth of God on the question of unity? Some of them overlap with others, some grow out of others, and all of them have this in common: they are human, not divine. These concepts will be stated in brief summary form only.

Unity through Councils

Bishops from local churches in certain regions met to discuss common problems during the 200’s A.D. Finally, in 325 A.D. the first so-called ecumenical (i.e. general or world-wide) council was held in Nicaea, Asia Minor. A great many church councils have been held since then, trying to maintain or create unity among professed Christians. The last major Roman Catholic council was the Second Vatican Council in 1962. Martin Luther rebelled against several important Roman Catholic doctrines in the 1500’s in Germany. He made a formal appeal for a general council on November 28, 1518, in an effort to vindicate his stand. Protestant Reformers and the denominations which came after them continued to seek unity through the council method.

Unity through Creeds

Councils often announced their conclusions about doctrinal issues in the form of creeds. “Creed” comes from the Latin word credo, “I believe.” Popes, emperors, and civil legislative bodies have gotten involved in the process of publishing creeds. Creeds are meant to be summary statements of truth, around which people can rally in the effort to have unity. The Nicene Creed was given to the world in 325 A.D. by the Council of Nicaea. It has not only been used by the Roman Catholic Church for centuries, it has also been retained by many Protestant denominations as a standard of unity. Some religious leaders in search of unity today are proposing the Nicene Creed as a piece of the unity puzzle in plans which are being formulated, since it existed before Romans, Greeks, or Protestants had become separate bodies. An early Reformation creed was the Augsburg Confession of 1530. This was the first Protestant confession of faith and represented the Lutheran branch of Reformation. The Lutherans and Zwinglians could not agree on this formulation. Melancthon revised it in an effort to make a standard acceptable to the Calvinists, but they eventually published their own creed-the Westminster Confession of Faith, 1647. Denominational creeds are still used today, though they seem to attract far less loyalty than they once did.

Unity through Some Leader Who Becomes a Symbol of Unity

Emperor Constantine was not even a nominal Christian when he arranged the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D., but he was looked up to by many church leaders and he did want to see the Christians settle their disputes. He became something of a symbol of unity as the prime mover behind the Nicene Council, but was nothing like the religious counterpart of the emperors which would come on the scene. Just as the emperors were symbols of civic unity in the Roman Empire, the Pope became the symbol of religious unity in the so-called Western Church (as distinguished from the Eastern or Greek Orthodox). The Bishop of Rome eventually took the title “pope” and claimed both spiritual and temporal authority as the personal representative of God. The popes are still “the center of unity” in Roman Catholicism. Other religious groups have relied on this approach-allowing some dominant figure to be the center of unity no matter what he said, how bad he contradicted himself, or how he lived. Classic examples are the Mormons with Joseph Smith, the Seventh Day Adventists with Ellen G. White, the Christian Scientists with Mary Baker Eddy. A more modern example is the Garner Ted Armstrong cult of the Seventh Day Church of God.

Unity through Force

Roman Catholicism initiated military crusades against certain early centers of religious dissent and reform, as against the Albigenses in France. As the Protestant Reformation picked up steam, Catholicism responded with the Inquisition-a systematic attempt to either convert or exterminate as many Reformers and their followers as possible. People were held incommunicado, tried without opportunity for defense, tortured, strangled, and burned at the stake by the forces of the Inquisition; which were especially strong in Spain. But the Protestant Reformation sometimes resorted to force as well. John Calvin warned Michael Servetus not to return to Geneva; when he did, he was imprisoned, tried, and burned at the stake. During the years that the English Reformation sought to establish itself, both Protestants and Roman Catholics were persecuted depending on who was controlling the civil power at any given time.

Fortunately, this approach to unity has largely fallen out of favor in many parts of the world, especially in the Western Hemisphere. Roger Williams is a manifestation of the disillusionment with unity through force. He came to New England, arriving at Boston on February 5, 1631, to escape persecution in England. His The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution for Cause of Conscience (1644) and The Bloudy Tenent yet More Bloudy (1652) are classic statements against the use of force in religious affairs. This method is excluded in countries which recognize separation of church and state, but many millions of people still live in countries which resort to force even in religious matters.

Unity of the Mystics

There were early Roman or Latin mystics, some of which became the subjects of fabulous traditions. More accurate information is available about more modern mystics. Jacob Boehme (1575-1624), a German, taught that the true church is in the heart and therefore not a visible entity. The church was to him a hidden reality or “a universal Church of the Spirit.” The mystical approach to unity includes supernatural experiences and revelations; the unity, like the experiences, are known only to those who “have” it.

Invisible Unity

This overlaps with the former one, but there are many forms and concepts and ideas that qualify as the approach of invisible unity. The common idea undergirding them all is a denial of doctrinal or “outward” unity. This approach requires the acceptance of much outward diversity in faith and practice. Invisible unity is “unity in diversity.” The thing held in common is not the Bible or a creed or allegiance to some visible leader, but is generally something nebulous to be defined and expressed by each individual on his own. Perhaps this “something” will be called “the Spirit,” “the brotherhood of the inward man,” “a small, still voice,” “the church within,” “faith,” “the untapped resources of the human soul,” “loyalty to Christ, without reference to outward forms,” “the voice of God within,” “the light of conscience,” etc. Unity in (the specified nebulosity) will be affirmed in spite of different views on God or Christ or the church and diverse practices regarding church organization, worship, discipline, mission, etc. Of course, some groups are willing to let this invisible unity reach out further than others are. The denominational plea of “The Man, Not the Plan” is a common example; the whole point of unity on this basis is to create unity around expression of loyalty to Jesus Christ in spite of diversity on how to come to Christ, how to obey Christ, and how to be loyal to Christ. Where there is visible diversity on the “plan,” there can be invisible unity accomplished through inward allegiance to something called “the man.” The Jesus Movement and the Pentecostal Movement are varieties of invisible unity. This whole approach is to affirm there is unity where there is obviously disunity; it is convenient, for all one must do is close his eyes to the obvious disunity. With his eyes thus closed, he is ready to say, “I see no disunity; what I see is unity.” It is much simpler than grappling with the real disunity!

Truth Magazine XXI: 39, pp. 614-615
October 6, 1977