FELLOWSHIP - Practice

IN GOOD HANDS

Fellowship - Principles Fellowship - Practice The emergence of error Ecclesial autonomy Quotes warning of error Divorce and re-marriage Appendix The 'exceptive clause'

Having established the principles, we go on to consider the practical effect these should have in ecclesial life, and the specific New Testament teaching on this topic.

Arising from individual fellowship with God and the Lord Jesus Christ comes fellowship with those who are like-minded. First we look at the way the term "fellowship" is employed. The Greek word normally used in the NT is koinonia, the English equivalents being "fellowship", "partnership", "participation", "communion". The word koinonia does not in itself have a solely "religious" meaning, but was used in regard to marriage, business partnerships and the like. For example, in Luke 5:10 we are told that James and John were "partners" (koinonos) with Simon in their fishing trade. Later they became partners in a far more exalted calling.

As the Gospel's work progressed so koinonia became increasingly used in relation to the Truth, those who served it, shared its work, its hope, its sufferings. Acts 2:42 records that :

"They continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayer."

Clearly there was far more involved in their fellowship than pleasant socialisation. There was something they all held in common, and it was something very big, very serious and of enormous importance. It was the Gospel of their salvation which bound them together.

'I thank my God upon every remembrance of you ... for your fellowship in the Gospel from the first day until now" (Philipp. 1:3,5.

All those who shared in that apostolic fellowship were believers of the gospel, who had confirmed their belief by submitting to the ordinance of baptism. Above all else in importance was the fact they were each brought thereby into fellowship with God and His Son Jesus:

"That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ" (1 John 1:3).

On this basis the Ecclesia of God is being developed. It consists of "all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ" (1 Cor. 1:2) who thus become the "body of Christ" (1 Cor. 12:12; Eph 1:22). But although this Ecclesia of God, is of necessity divided up into individual ecclesia's - such as 'the church (ecclesia) of God which is at Corinth" (1 Cor. 1:2) - each such ecclesia is part of that one body. It therefore follows that there must be unanimity of belief and practice throughout the whole body of believers, otherwise its unity is destroyed.

The Necessity of Correct Belief and Practice

Acts 2v42 quoted above couples fellowship with doctrine - "the apostles' doctrine and fellowship". "Doctrine" simply means teaching, and what the apostles taught is summarised in the phrase "the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ" (Acts 8:12). Each of those two concepts is fundamental to God's saving Truth. If we examine what we call the "first principles" of our faith we shall find that they all have a direct relationship with one or other or both of these two fundamentals. For example:  

In addition to these, such fundamentals as the omnipotence of the Lord our God and the work of the Holy Spirit are clearly applicable to all aspects of the Gospel.

From the above premises it will be evident that wrong beliefs, such as those that Christendom has adopted, prevent a person from a proper understanding of God's Truth. A belief in heaven going is incompatible with a belief of the things concerning the kingdom; likewise to believe in a supernatural devil makes it impossible to understand the redemptive work of Christ; those are just two examples. One does not have to take on board all wrong beliefs to prevent a correct understanding of the Gospel message, one "heresy" may be enough.

It is for this reason that full instruction of applicants for baptism is so important. It is just not enough for a man to say "I believe in Jesus as my Saviour". He can say that quite sincerely and still be retaining some gospel-nullifying beliefs.

There is sometimes a degree of impatience over the lengthy course of instruction before baptism. Do we have to go into so much detail? It is of course possible to place too much insistence on "head knowledge", but it is impossible to over-estimate the importance of thoroughly understanding the first principles such as those mentioned above. For the Truth's sake, and for the individual's sake, it is essential to ensure that instruction is comprehensive.

As well as right beliefs, it is clear from the Scriptures that our actions and manner of life must also conform to Divine requirements. The plea of John the Baptist was. "Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance (margin: answerable to amendment of life)"; and whether we go to Christ's "Sermon on the mount" or to any of the epistles we shall find the same emphasis on the importance of right action. To speak, as we sometimes do, of "doctrine and practice" is a little misleading. "Doctrine", as we have seen, means teaching, and the teaching of Christ was as practical as could be. "Belief and practice" would be a better phrase.

The Breaking of Bread

Along with "doctrine and fellowship", Luke includes "breaking of bread" among the basic elements of true Christian life (Acts 2:42) The frequent partaking of bread and wine in remembrance of Christ's death is a command (1Corinthians 11:23-25), one that should be kept willingly and lovingly, and which is a token of fellowship with the Father, the Lord Jesus, and with each other. The first century ecclesia's met on the first day of the week for this purpose. (Acts 20v7) It is recognised that some, by force of circumstances, cannot always join in this communal remembrance, and may be obliged to break bread alone ( although they will not be alone, for the Lord will be with those who are sincere and earnest in the truth) However, deliberate abstinence from partaking of the emblems, and forsaking the assembling of ourselves together without just cause, are contrary to Christ's commands. If long continued it can break the precious fellowship that the breaking of bread signifies.

The breaking of bread also brings a communal responsibility to ensure that all participants "all speak the same thing" (1Corinthians 1:10). Those partaking of the emblems share together "one bread" as members of "one body" (1Corinthians 10:17), and this fellowship can only occur between those who "walk in the light" (1John 1:7). This principle is broken if we share the emblems with those who differ from us on fundamental issues.

Ecclesial Discipline

The ideal set before us in the Scriptures is that of perfect unity:

"that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment" (1 Cor. 1:10)

It is an ideal unattainable by mortal men and women. There will be no perfect fellowship this side of the Kingdom. Nevertheless this is what we have to strive for.

Sadly, but inevitably, there will be times when attempts are made to introduce errors into the ecclesia's. The apostles warned us that this would be so. (Acts 20:19-20; 2 Tim. 4:3. 2 Peter 2:1; 1 John 2:18-19) They also told us plainly what we must do if error is persists and is not forsaken. For example:

"Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received from us" (2 Thess. 3:6).

This is a clear command which we cannot ignore.

Because we are conscious of our own shortcomings we may feel reluctant to withdraw from an erring member. "It could so easily have been me" is our reaction, and rightly so. Humility, not self-righteousness, is the only frame of mind when withdrawal is called for. Moreover, we need to understand exactly what we are doing. We are standing aside from the wrongdoer. We do not judge him, but neither do we support him. We say in effect, 'If you are determined to go down that path, you must go without us. We cannot stop you, but we will not accompany you nor bid you 'God speed'.'

We are NOT condemning the offender nor seeking to usurp the authority of Christ in the coming day of judgment. We are NOT declaring the brother/ sister to be now out of fellowship with God. This we have no power to do. The expression "withdraw fellowship from" is sometimes used. This could be misleading and dangerous. "Withdraw OURSELVES FROM" is the Scriptural expression and is therefore preferable.

We ARE seeking to bring home to an erring member the gravity of his position, so that he may repent and thus escape future rejection by Christ.

• "If any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet count him not as an enemy but admonish him as a brother " (2 Thess. 3:14-15).

• "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them " (Eph. 5:11 ).

• "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds" (2 John 10-11).

This last quotation makes clear that any who refuse to support the ecclesia in its repudiation of error have to be ranked alongside the errorist himself. This principle is rooted in the Old Testament: for example, "When thou sawest a thief, then thou consentedst with him, and hast been partaker with adulterers... " (Psa. 50:18). It often complicates decision-making, but cannot be evaded.

Withdrawal, it must be emphasised, although undoubtedly a command of Christ, is a last resort after all effort to turn an erring brother or sister back to sound doctrine and practice has been unsuccessful. The errors that necessitate withdrawal are, of course, serious ones, that clearly contravene Scripture, and not the lapses we are all guilty of daily and for which we seek forgiveness in our nightly prayers. The examples that are found in the New Testament relate to errors of belief (e.g. 2 John 10-1 1) and practice (e.g. 1 Cor 5:3-5, 9-13; 2 Thess.3:6).

In trying to discharge this sad duty when it is required, we do not have the benefit of Spirit guidance such as the apostles had, and which may sometimes have made their actions seem somewhat peremptory (for example Ananias and Sapphira). We need to proceed with great caution and humility, always indeed with much anguish and anxiety, but we must not shirk our duty. For as well as having a duty to warn and reprove the offender for the sake of his own eventual salvation, we have also a duty to the body of faithful believers. "Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven..." (1 Cor. 5:6-7).

Ecclesial Responsibility for Unity

The ecclesia is the body responsible, through its appointed representatives, for the discharge of all these duties, for the instruction and proper baptism of new members, for the spiritual as well as physical welfare of all its member, for the repudiation of error and, where ultimately necessary, for withdrawal from unruly or erring members. These duties are carried out by each ecclesia on behalf of the whole body of believers, and therefore there must be complete agreement among all ecclesia's as to the basis on which fellowship is offered or withheld. As previously stated, we believe that all ecclesia's in a community should be regarded as part of a single body; the division into individual ecclesia's being only a matter of geographical convenience.

For this reason the concept of 'ecclesial autonomy' in matters relating to fundamentals of belief is rejected by the Dawn community. On non-fundamental matters there must be ecclesial independence. We firmly reject any idea of a central controlling body.

Re-baptism

The question has sometimes been raised as to the validity of baptisms carried out by Christadelphian communities with whom we are not in fellowship. If we believe them to be in error, how can we accept their baptisms as valid? Should we not re-immerse them when they seek to join us?

Re-immersion should be carried out, where it becomes clear that there were wrong beliefs, or a quite inadequate understanding of first principles at the time of baptism. But more often it becomes clear that the applicant has always held a sound understanding of the Truth, but has become exercised at the failure of the community he is leaving to uphold Scriptural standards. The validity of a person's baptism rests on the state of his own heart and mind at the time, not on those who baptised him.

"One Body"

There is a further difficulty that some seem to experience. Because in some cases we concede that one who is not recognised as being in fellowship with us may still be in good standing with the Father, as we hope we ourselves are, ought we not to fellowship that person? The short answer is that we do not know the state of any man's heart, and we do not know the standing that any one of us has in God's sight, and can only trust in His merciful forgiveness when we err.

A similar argument runs that because there is only 'one body" of Christ, it is wrong to divide it. But we do not know who is or who is not part of the body of Christ. It is not merely a question of being validly baptised, or being called a Christadelphian. Division within the body is not prevented by tolerating wrong belief or practice, inaction merely masks it. True unity can only exist where there is unanimity on fundamental issues.

The Letters to the Seven Ecclesia's

These are frequently advanced as reasons for tolerating error in the ecclesia's, leaving Christ to be the final arbiter. It is alleged that each ecclesia addressed was not held responsible for the errors in the others, and there is no evidence that the faithful ecclesia's had withdrawn from the unfaithful ones.

There are several weaknesses in this argument. It is unwise to try to establish principles from situations of which we today are unaware; especially if other clear scriptures are thereby negated. The fact is that the letters pointed out the wrong of harbouring error; Pergamos being strongly reprimanded for its failure to deal with wrong doctrine in its midst, and Thyatira for 'suffering' false teachers. It is therefore disappointing to find these same letters used by some today to justify non-withdrawal from persistent error. We need to ask ourselves if we would happily be members of an ecclesia which Christ addressed in such forthright words of criticism and condemnation. Surely the answer is NO!

The overall message of the letters to all the churches was that errors of belief and practice were being permitted by some, and this was a cause of severe reproof from Christ, with the threat of punishment if the situation was not corrected. The warning is also for our times:

'He that hath an ear let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches" (Rev. 2:29).

The present divided state of Christadelphian's gives no pleasure or satisfaction to any of us, and is a reproach to our human weakness. The ecclesia's known as the Dawn Christadelphian community are not glad or proud to be separated, how can we be, when families and close friendships are thereby fractured? We are simply trying in all good conscience to carry out the instructions of our Master, who made it so clear that our love for him must transcend all earthly relationships, and who equated our love for him with keeping his commandments (Matt. 10:37; John 15:14).

www.dawnchristadelphians.org