I went to the “Churches of Christ” Wikipedia page and saw this at the top:
This article is about a specific fellowship of Christian congregations. For Churches of Christ that do not agree with congregational support of church or parachurch organizations, see Churches of Christ (non-institutional). For groups of autonomous congregations in Europe using the name “church of Christ” that have unclear association with the Restoration Movement, see Churches of Christ in Europe. For other uses, see Church of Christ.
Okay, I was raised among the group they label “non-institutional,” so I started there. I clicked on that link. At the top of that page, I read:
The label “non-institutional” refers to a distinct fellowship within the Churches of Christ who do not agree with the support of parachurch organizations (colleges, orphans’ homes, organized mission efforts, etc.) by local congregations. They contend that the New Testament includes no authority for churches’ support of such institutions. Instead they feel that it is a responsibility and duty of the individual members to assist those in need. Similarly, most non-institutional congregations also oppose the use of church facilities for non-church activities (such as fellowship dinners or recreation); as such, they oppose the construction of “fellowship halls”, gymnasiums, and similar structures.
Right off the bat, this segment of churches of Christ is defined by what they are NOT—not a healthy start. Reading further, I found this:
Many outside of these churches sometimes conflate them with other Churches of Christ having similar roots, such as:
- groups which serve the Lord’s Supper sharing a single cup (commonly referred to as “one-cup” congregations or “one-cuppers”),
- groups which oppose divided, age-distinct Bible classes, and
- groups which oppose paid preachers, but encourage members of the congregation to speak and lead the worship activities (commonly referred to as “mutual edification” congregations).
More segmentation. In the first couple of paragraphs in these two articles I have seen the following divisions: Mainline, Non-Institutional, One-Cup, No-Bible-Class, and Mutual Edification churches of Christ.
The rest of the article contains further information about historical infighting and division and (largely unsuccessful) attempts at unity and reconciliation among the various sects.
Now, you can’t believe everything you read online, and you certainly shouldn’t trust everything you read on Wikipedia, but having studied the Restoration Movement and how churches of Christ developed in the United States, I believe this.
Ironically, the men who spearheaded the Restoration Movement thought they were going to unite all denominations into a single, monolithic fellowship of churches which all just practiced simple New Testament Christianity. Things did not go as planned, and, sadly, sectarianism has saturated the Restoration Movement.
I grew up in north Birmingham, AL, and our family attended a small church of Christ in Mt. Olive, AL. Within a 6- or 7-mile radius of the Mt. Olive church building are the meeting houses of the Fultondale church of Christ, North Gardendale church of Christ, Gardendale church of Christ, and Decatur Highway church of Christ. We didn’t have anything to do with the Decatur Highway church because they were mainline and “liberal,” but we went to gospel meetings at all the other churches and invited them to ours. If you dig into the history, most of those little churches came into being because Christians couldn’t get along with each other and split. It wasn’t about growing the kingdom; it was about getting away from brethren.
As I have talked with more and more Christians from other areas, I have discovered this kind of division and rivalry is not uncommon among our people.
Why Is There So Much Division?
From my perspective, the way we teach faithfulness to Bible authority has a lot to do with this. We tend to equate faithfulness to God with faithfulness to the details of His word—specifically in the areas of corporate worship and how we spend the collected money of the church. As soon as someone decides that he’s okay with spending the money in an “unauthorized way,” we mark him for excommunication because we don’t see him as having an “honest heart” or being obedient to God’s authority. If the man doesn’t renounce his ways, we kick him out and spread the word that he has gone liberal and doesn’t care about following the Bible anymore. I know that sounds terribly cynical, but I’ve seen it too many times.
- If a person thinks God likes instrumental worship music, he’s out.
- If a person thinks people could eat together in the church building, he’s out.
- If a person thinks Christians could eat the Supper on Thursday in addition to Sunday, he’s out.
Churches of Christ tend to put up with backsliding and backbiting more than they put up with differences of opinions on the theological details of how God saves men.
I’ve seen folks put up with varied perspectives of the sacrifice of Christ: is Jesus’ blood a ransom paid to Satan, was He a substitute for the sinner, did He pay the penalty the sinner was supposed to receive, or is the cross just an awesome example of God’s love to motivate sinners to serve Him? Preachers among churches of Christ seem fine with believing and teaching various views on this. They also seem comfortable entertaining different teachings on the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (as long as one doesn’t go charismatic).
But if a person believes the Bible teaches original sin or salvation by faith alone, those are grounds for permanent separation. Those teachings are often equated immediately with “Calvinism,” and everyone starts teaching against TULIP.
We categorize things we will tolerate and not break fellowship over and things which are deal-breakers. Everyone does this, and it’s important that we do. However, it’s important that we categorize correctly, and herein lies the problem.
Straining out the Gnat and Swallowing the Camel
You’ve heard of majoring in minors and minoring in majors? If not, you’ll recall the words of Christ: “You strain out a gnat and swallow a camel.” Both the gnat and the camel were unclean animals, so the picture would have been ludicrous and abhorrent to Jesus’ Jewish audience. They were taking infinite care to filter out the smallest of the unclean animals from their tea…and then taking a huge bite out of a camel steak on their plate.
Jesus confronted the Pharisees in Matthew 23.23–24 over their strict tithing of the smallest of their garden herbs while at the same time neglecting such matters as justice, mercy, and faithfulness! Jesus was not upset that they paid such close attention to the small matters—but He wanted them to understand that those were small matters compared to the “weightier matters of the law.”
They went even beyond matters of the Law, though. They made up many more rules than God ever did. They had ways of swearing which made the oath either binding or not binding (Matt. 23.16–22). They thought they only had to be righteous on the outside (Matt. 23.25–28). They permitted themselves to hate in their heart as long as they didn’t raise their hand to do violence (Matt. 5.21–22). They thought they could lust as long as they didn’t touch (Matt. 5.27–30). They thought they could divorce whenever they wanted as long as the divorce papers were clean (Matt. 5.31–32; 19.3–9). They thought they could retaliate against the one who did them wrong (Matt. 5.38–42). They thought they could hate their enemy (Matt. 5.43–48).
The Pharisees equated breaking the traditions of the elders with breaking God’s law (Matt. 15.1–9), but Jesus said their worship was vain because they were standing on the authority of men and not God. In fact, their man-made rules were circumventing God’s plain teachings to honor their father and mother.
They ended up roundly condemning Jesus (God’s precious Son!) and demanding He be crucified.
They thought themselves righteous…as most righteous, in fact. They thought they were the only ones going to heaven. They condemned almost everyone around them, and they demanded that everyone else interpret the Law the way they did, or they wouldn’t accept him as their brother.
This, I believe, is the mindset of many among churches of Christ today. We have been majoring in minors and minoring in majors. We have focused so intently on a small group of pet doctrines (acapella singing, what specific day and how often the Lord’s Supper must be observed, how the church’s money should be spent, what a person must know before he is baptized, how exactly to parse marriage, divorce, and remarriage questions, etc.) that we have missed some of the “weightier matters of the Law.”
Mercy Is Lacking
One of the greatest themes Jesus preached was mercy. Compassion. Helping others. And not just helping other brothers who look like us, but helping those who society might say are our enemies. Remember the good Samaritan (Luke 10.25–37)?
Do you want to dedicate your wealth to the Lord? Okay, great. Do that. But do not use that as an excuse to not take care of your parents or others who are in need! God wants you to use your wealth that you are dedicating to Him to serve those around you.
Do you want to stand up for the authority of the Lord? Excellent and perfect. Do that. But do not use that as an excuse to cause division or stir up controversies which tear the body of Christ apart instead of build it up.
Too many seem to forget (did they know in the first place?) that we are saved by God because God is merciful (Tit. 3.5; Eph. 2.4; Rom. 2.4). What standard, then, will we show to a brother? Will we demand he repent exactly the way we tell him he should? Must he use the words we tell him to say?
Will we narrow our fellowship only to those who interpret the Bible the way we do? I’m not saying the Bible can be interpreted any old way. If it says God hates divorce and homosexuality and murder, that’s clear. But if someone believes they can worship God by singing with their guitar, will we break fellowship for that? If someone says he washes his hands out of religious duty to the Lord, will we excommunicate him? If someone believes it a sin to have a located preacher, will we consider him not a brother? The list could be endless of items which require interpretation and reasoning to find Biblical guidance. The fact that many of us worship in buildings purchased by the church shows we are willing to discover Biblical guidance even when there is no clear command, example, or necessary implication. At the least, can we admit when we are in debatable territory? Romans 14 comes to mind.
The principle of mercy is huge. If we do not show mercy to others, God will not show mercy to us. This is the point of “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you” (Matt. 7.1–2). “So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment” (James 2.12–13).
Jesus judged the Pharisees with their own standard. They judged their brethren harshly; they were judged harshly.
How do you want Jesus to judge you?