Why expressions of Christian unity are vital… but dangerous.

 

This Sunday 11^th June Magdalen Road Church will be gathered on Broad Street with thousands of other Christians representing dozens of churches. The world around and the majority of ordinary believers will see this as obviously a good thing. How could there be anything negative about Christians gathering in united praise and worship? I want to explain to you that it is more complex and delicate than that. Public expressions of Christian unity are indeed vital…but dangerous.

Let me briefly set out a what I believe the Bible says on this issue in a series of statements.

 

The Bible is absolutely clear all believers are one in Christ Jesus (e.g. Gal 3:28, Eph 2:14-17, 3:6, 1 Ti 2:5). No distinction of race, language, gender, social status, or moral history means anything to God. All share the same forgiveness in Christ our only saviour, have the same life by the one Spirit, owe allegiance to the same God and Father of all, and share in the same hope of resurrection life (Eph 4:4-6).

 

The Bible is also clear that this unity must not only be acknowledged, it must be expressed. We are to make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace (Eph 4:3).  We are to love one another (John 13:34, 35, Rom 13:8, 1 Pet 1:22, 1 John 3:1, 23, 4:7, 11, 12, 2 John 5, see also Col 2:2, Phil 2:2). And that love must be expressed not in word only but with actions (1 John 3:18). We are to rid ourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind (1 Peter 2:1). We are to care in practical ways (e.g. Rom 15:27, Acts 6:1, James 1:27). Disunity amongst believers is to be fought against with the utmost vigour (1 Cor 1:10, Phil 4:2). Indeed when Peter, a Jew, started eating separately from gentile believers in Antioch, Paul vigorously opposed him. He was not acting in line with the truth of the gospel (Gal 2:14) which insists that all believers are justified simply by faith in Jesus Christ (Gal 2:16). Tolerating divisions over secondary issues, gives those issues an importance that they must not have, and cuts at the heart of true gospel unity.

 

Alongside these truths, however, we must take seriously the Bible’s warnings that there will be false teachers among you (2 Peter 2:1) and that such serious errors are deeply dangerous (2 Peter 2). We are to test the Spirits (1 John 4:1-3). We are to have nothing to do with those who teach serious error (2 Tim 3:5, 2 Cor 6:14-15, Rev 2:20). Not everyone who says to [Jesus] ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom (Mat 7:21). Jesus told a story of a man who attended a wedding party and yet was not appropriately dressed. Tragically he was thrown into the darkness (Mat 22:13). Our love and our deeds are always to be in truth (1 Peter 3:18, Eph 4:15) or others may be catastrophically led astray.

 

So, in the real world, we are left with difficult and complex decisions as we try to express both our Christian unity, and the seriousness of some errors. The early church struggle with just these issues. When divisions appeared between Jewish and gentile believers Paul went to Jerusalem in order to reach a common understanding. He explains that there were certain truths that he could not fudge even if the Jerusalem church itself denied them. The truth of the gospel was at stake (Gal 2:1-5). However he was often prepared to live with compromises which maintained unity if they did not compromise the gospel. At the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:1ff) Paul was prepared to put his name to a document which advocated certain restrictions on gentile believers in order not to offend Jews. On another occasion Paul was prepared to engage in Jewish rituals, and to worship at the Temple, in order to demonstrate his unity with Jewish Christians who were still uncomfortable with the extent of the Christian freedom that he preached (Acts 21:17-26). This despite his insistence that we are not to judged by our adherence to such rituals (Col 2:16) and should not abide by them because they lack any value (Col 2:23). Paul was prepared to circumcise Timothy (Acts 16:3) for similar reasons despite the fact that, probably only a few weeks earlier he had written to the Galatians that if you let yourselves be circumcised Christ will be of no value to you at all (Gal 5:2).

Putting all these things together it is clear that Paul wrestled with these issues and made different decisions on different occasions. On the same issue he could be prepared to stand alone against the world, and later to be totally flexible. This was not because he was inconsistent, but because he knew that the same actions carried different messages in different places. In practice Christians have concluded that certain central and defining doctrines such as justification by faith, the deity and humanity of Christ, the necessity of moral and spiritual renewal and the authority of scripture are key issues that must be defended, even at the expense of threatening Christian unity. Other issues, such as baptismal practice, the nature of charismatic gifts and church governance have been recognised as secondary. There is, however, no clear dividing line between primary and secondary issues – rather the relative importance of some issues will rise and fall depending on the precise circumstances and the wider agendas involved. All of this is thoroughly in line with our New Testament observations about the difficult, delicate and complex issues with which the early church wrestled.

 

So what does this have to say to the Love Oxford event on Sunday? I will spare you the gory details of a difficult and complex set of discussions but it has become clear recently that there is to be a prayer of dedication at the beginning in which we will all (and church leaders in particular) be invited to express penitence for past divisions. Of course I am keen to express penitence for divisions between true believers, some of them unnecessarily divided by denominational boundaries, and I profoundly regret the fact that people on all sides have been involved in shedding the blood of others. 

But the agenda of some at least associated with Love Oxford has gone beyond that. As I write it is intended that a Catholic lay person who also represents the Churches Together movement will stand on the platform as an explicit act of unity across the two great divides of Catholic/Protestant and Evangelical/Liberal. Though, by Sunday, things may have moved on somewhat, such a show of unity without careful qualification and much discussion, would in my view be a great slight to the memory of Cranmer, Latimer and Ridley, who died on Broad Street for their faith, and whose faith we proclaim. I have been invited to write a preface to the prayer which clarifies what we are penitent for, but at present it is not clear whether it will be read, and in addition the visible act of unity itself stands in grave danger of neutralising any words of qualification which may or may not be read.

I therefore, very reluctantly, have concluded, alongside a number of others, that I cannot stand on the platform during the prayer of penitence. As elders we continue to endorse the overall vision of the event since so much of it is about true gospel unity. The speakers are evangelical believers, as are the organisers. As individuals you must decide whether you want to pray the prayer of penitence, knowing before the Lord what you mean and don’t mean in saying it.

I can say that my discussions with the organisers have been cordial and friendly. It is my prayer that in attending the event, we as a church will demonstrate the unity of the Spirit, and in my absence from the platform I will demonstrate a commitment to the faith once for all entrusted to the saints (Jude 3). Over all I and the organisers are committed working hard to keep the unity of the Spirit though the bond of peace. (Eph 4:3)