the non-sectarian plea in retrospect and prospect
TRANSCRIPT
Leaven Leaven
Volume 2 Issue 3 The Restoration Ideal Article 6
1-1-1993
The Non-Sectarian Plea in Retrospect and Prospect The Non-Sectarian Plea in Retrospect and Prospect
Monroe Hawley
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven
Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology
and Philosophy of Religion Commons
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Hawley, Monroe (1992) "The Non-Sectarian Plea in Retrospect and Prospect," Leaven: Vol. 2 : Iss. 3 , Article 6. Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol2/iss3/6
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Religion at Pepperdine Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Leaven by an authorized editor of Pepperdine Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected].
20 Leaven, Summer1993
THE NON-SECTARIAN PLEAIn Retrospect
And Prospect
It was in March, 1864, that Moses E. Lard askedin his quarterly, "Have We Not Become a Sect?"! Sixyears later, W.K.Pendleton, editor ofthe MillennialHarbinger, requested three influential brotherhoodpapers to respond to these questions: (1) "what issectarianism?" (2) "are we a sect?" and (3) "are theresectarians holding prominent or representative po-sitions among us?"? Only Benjamin Franklin, editorof the American Christian Review, responded.
Restoration leaders hotly debated these issuesin the latter part of the nineteenth century. Todaywestill wrestle with them. For those in the restorationheritage these are troubling questions because ourmovement has opposed sectarianism form its in-ception.
The Restoration Movement began as an effort topromote Christian unity in a world deeply divided bysectarianism. Because the leaders believed that themany creeds of the day impeded that unity, theycalled for a return to the Bible as the sole writtensource ofreligious authority. In the Declaration andAddress, the most significant document in the his-tory of the movement, Thomas Campbell decried thestatus of Christianity at the start ofthe nineteenthcentury:
Instead of her catholic constitutional
Monroe Hawley, serves as the minister for theChurch of Christ in Milwaukee. Wisconsin
By Monroe Hawley
unity and purity, what does the Churchpresent us with, at this day, but a catalogueof sects and sectarian systems - eachbinding its respective party, by the mostsacred and solemn engagements, to con-tinue as it is to the end of the world: atleast. This is confessedly the case withmany of them. What a sorry substitutethese are for Christian unity and love!
Leaders of the movement perceived the meansofachieving unity to be the restoration ofthe ancientorder, a return to the simple faith of the earlyChristians. When all people united upon theteachings ofthe Bible and duplicated the pattern ofthe early church, there would be unity and the divinebody would be non-sectarian. The writings of thepioneers ofthe movement are replete with condem-nation of "the sects" and sectarianism. Obviously amovement that decried the evils of sectarianismwould do all it could to be non-sectarian.
Initially the movement was exactly that - amovement cutting across sectarian lines, callingpeople out of their denominations to be just Chris-tians. they often declared, "While we profess to beChristians only, we do not claim to be the onlyChristians." As the Campbell movement spreadacross the western frontier, it picked up steam assimilar effortsjoined forces with them. Beginningin1832, the merger of the Campbell "Reformers" andthe "Christians," led by Barton W. Stone, seemed tovalidate the ideal of non-sectarian unity on therestoration basis.
However, it soon became apparent that the
1
Hawley: The Non-Sectarian Plea in Retrospect and Prospect
Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 1992
religious world as a whole would not buy the plat-form, especially when the reformers insisted onimmersion for the forgiveness of sins. Doors thathad been opened were now closed and the movementwas forcedto an independent status in which religiousneighbors viewed them as just another denomina-tion. It was this status that prompted much soul-searching asking if the movement had become adenomination, and, if so,how could they profess to beundenominational?
It is pertinent at this point to inquire how therestoration leaders defined sectarianism. The Greekword hairesis from which our word sect is derived inthe New testament carries the idea of party orfaction. It is used six times in Acts where the R. S.V. renders it always has a bad connotation andconveys the idea of the party spirit or factions. Thereason the epistles look negatively upon hairesis isthat the Scriptures picture the church as a unifiedbodywhich cannot tolerate division. Sectarianism isdivision. The church must be organically andspiritually united and therefore hairesis or sectari-anism is wrong.
In the post-apostolic period, however, the defi-nition of hairesis shifted. Early in the second cen-tury Ignatius attached the meaning ofheresy to theword." That definition persisted in religious circlesand was embraced by many of the early leaders ofthe Restoration Movement, including AlexanderCampbell. Campbell believed that when error istaught it leads men to form parties around the falseteaching. Thus sectarianism. It is clear that falseteaching contributes to sectarianism in the biblicalsense of factionalism. But the equation of heresyand sectarianism is not adequate. Campbell neverseems to have faced the issue ofwhether one can bebiblically correct and still be sectarian because he isfictional
Barton W. Stone had a different concept ofsectarianism. He saw it as the party spirit. As theReformers and Christians merged their efforts in1832,Stone was exasperated by the partisanship hesaw among those professing to be non-sectarian.Finally, he wrote:
The scriptures willnever keep togetherin union, and fellowship members not inthe spirit ofthe scriptures, which spirit islove, peace, unity, forbearance, andcheerful obedience. This is the spirit ofthe great Head ofthe body. I blush for myfellows, whohold up the Bible as the bondofunion yet make their opinions ofit testsof fellowship: who plead for union of allChristians: yet refuse fellowship with
The Restoration Ideal 21
such as dissent from their notions. Vainmen! Their zeal is not according toknowledge, which will declare it. Suchantisectarian-sectarians are doingmore mischief to the cause, and ad-vancement of truth, the unity ofChristains, and the salvation of theworld, than all the skeptics in theworld. In fact, they make skept ics,"
Stone was on target in pointing out that amovement committed to the destruction of sectari-anism was plagued by the very malady it opposed!The problem was that those displaying the symptomsdid not realize they had a problem. Sectarianism isinsidious, infecting those who have not the slightestidea that it has taken hold of them.
The diverse views of Campbell and Stone as towhat constitutes non-sectarian. Adherents toCampbell's position generally understand that non-sectarian Christianity is measured in terms of cor-rect doctrine. This was the view of Moses Lard whowrote:
It is proper here to remark that it notnecessary for a party to be wholly corruptin order to be a sect. A single false idea isenough, provided this is made the basis onwhich the party is formed."
Acorollary ofLard's position that false teachingresults in sectarianism is that to be non-sectarianone must be doctrinally correct. This resulted in apre-occupation, still apparent today, with rootingout heresy in order to be non-sectarian. In 1837Arthur Crihfield founded a paper called The Her-etic Detector and Reformer specifically devotedto that task.
An examination of the names of periodicals inthe Restoration Movement reveals that many ofthem were designed to expose erroneous teaching,not tobuild up the faithful. True, false doctrine mustbe opposed, but when brotherhood watchdogs likeCrihfield control our thinking, a sectarian mentalitysoon develops.
In conjunction with different restoration viewsof sectarianism, note should be made of the socio-logical theory of the development of sects. Early inthe twentieth century sociologists began exploringthe relationship between religion and social thought.A pioneer in this study was Ernst Troeltsch in TheSocial Teaching of the Christian Churches.Troeltsch sought to identify the process by whichdissenting religious bodies grew out of establishedreligion. Others such as Richard Niebuhr refined
2
Leaven, Vol. 2 [1992], Iss. 3, Art. 6
https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol2/iss3/6
22 Leaven, Summer1993
the theory which raises many challenging questionsfor those of us who seek the recovery of authentic
Tobe truly non-sectarian wemust understand that in thebiblical sense the church isnot defined in terms of "ourbrotherhood," but is com-posed of everyone who is achild of God by virtue ofobeying the gospel.
Christianity. Among the conclusions drawn fromthis theory is that religious sects derive their iden-tity from their insistence that they have the truth,the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So longas a body of people is sectarian, its identity is amatter of fact.
If the sociological conclusion equating religiousidentity with sectarianism is valid (I think in generalit is), this poses a major question for those associatedwith the Restoration Movement. Since those in themovement have long professed to be non-sectarian,is it possible to have an identity while still opposingsectarianism? If it is not, is there any value inmaking a pretense ofbeing non-sectarian? I believethat it is possible, but, before explaining how, someobservations must be made.
Religious identity among any people necessarilyrelates to doctrine, and there are certain irreducibletenents of our faith that cannot be compromised.John drew a hard line against the gnostics when hedeclared that those who deny that Jesus Christ hascome in the flesh are the antichrists (1 John 2:18 -23). Believing that Jesus actually came in the fleshis a vital doctrine in our faith and is one element inour doctrinal identity.
The restoration ideal places a high priority ondoctrine in the search for authentic Christianity. Astudy of the epistles quickly establishes the impor-tance attached to correct teaching in the early church.The problem we all face is determining how muchlatitude can be allowed in our beliefs if we are to betruly non-sectarian. A common practice of religioussects is to define their teachings very narrowly andby this process exclude all who disagree on specificissues. Identity is found in doctrinal agreement.
The nineteenth century restorationists par-tiallyfound identity in doctrinal beliefs. Eschewingcreeds and denominational organizations, they calledfor unity on the basis of the Bible alone. While theywere in basic agreement with most Protestants, theyoften chose to emphasize their disagreements. Theydissented in two primary areas - the ancient gospel(relating to conversion, especially baptism) and theancient order (the structures and ordinances of thechurch, especially weekly observance of the Lord'ssupper). Unfortunately, some vital teachings, suchas holiness and the atonement of Christ, were ne-glected. It was not that they did not accept thesetruths: rather they assumed everybody alreadybelieved them.
Instead of a goal to be sought, some believedrestoration to be an accomplished fact. This seemsto have been true of Walter Scott.' Others thoughtof restoration as a process. There is a dichotomybetween restoration seen as a state and restorationviewed as a process. Those who think restoration isa state that has been fully achieved find identity indoctrinal correctness. If one is right in every essen-tial doctrine, he is part of the body of Christ andshares his identity with others who believe as hedoes. They believe that those who disagree aresectarian because they have espoused heresy. Bydefining the true church purely on the basis ofdoctrinal accuracy, they have themselves fitted themold ofsectarianism as sociologicallydefined, thoughthey profess to be non-sectarian!
On the other hand, those who see restoration asa process be which one continually strives to recoverthe biblical ideal are faced with a dilemma if theyacknowledge that they do not have a corner on thetruth. If sectarianism is indeed the source of iden-tity, and they profess to be non-sectarian, how canthey find identity in a sectarian world?
The answer to this question is found by definingundenominational Christianity. Biblically speaking,the church and the saved are identical. When one issaved from his sins, he is added to the divine body.The church is the saved! To be truly non-sectarianwe must understand that in the biblical sense thechurch is not defined in terms of "our brotherhood,"but is composed ofeveryone who is a child of God byvirtue of obeying the gospel. It includes some wehave never heard about and some whom we believeto be in doctrinal error. More than likely it excludessome that we list on our church rolls. Ultimately,only God himself knows those who are his.
In the latter part of the 19th century and earlypart of the 20th there were several men who triedearnestly to communicate this ideal to their hearers.They included Benjamin Franklin and his son, Jo-
3
Hawley: The Non-Sectarian Plea in Retrospect and Prospect
Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 1992
seph, F. G. Allen, F. D. Srygley, M. C. Kurfees, J. N.Armstrong, and G. C. Brewer. Srygley wrote:
My understanding of the New Testa-ment is that all Christians are in thechurch ofGod. The same thin that makesone a Christian constitutes him a memberof the church. When Christians get intosects, parties, or denominations, they arein something more than the church ofGod. A Christian who belongs to theBaptist Church, for instance, is in thechurch of God and the Baptist churchboth. The idea is to get him out of theBaptist Church and leave him in thechurch of God.
Though the ideal of undenominational Christi-anity is very simple, it is hard to communicatebecause we live in a society attuned to sectarianthinking. We have allowed our religious neighborsto mold our thought patterns. I believe most Chris-tians in congregations associated with the Restora-tion Movement have not grasped the non-sectarianideal. Perhaps that is because those who are teachingthem have not understood it either.
To return to the question posed earlier, how canwe have an identity without becoming sectarian?My response is that identity must be found in Christin the context of being genuinely non-sectarian.This is what the pioneers ofthe restoration Movementsought. If one is truly non-sectarian, he is set apartfrom the sectarian world just as the one wholives theholy life is set apart form others who live sinful lives.Would not the Apostle Paul, were he with us today,proclaim that contemporary sectarianism is just aswrong as it was in first-centruy Corinth? And wouldhe not call all of us to be just Christians - nothingmore and nothing less?
Our plea to be Christians only has a powerfulappeal to the world. It is a call to authentic Christi-anity. That the call has often gone unheeded indi-cates that we have not always practiced what wepreached. Ifwe ask others to be just Christians butexhibit the sectarian spirit, our actions believe ourwords.
What is involved in practicing non-sectarianChristianity? First, we must truly understand theconcept. We must expand our thinking beyond thebounds of brotherhood issues which prescribe thelimits of our fellowship. This means that we willrecognize as brethren those who have obeyed thesame gospel we have, but with whom we differ indoctrinal matters. It does not mean that we endorsetheir errors or participate with them in things we
The Restoration Ideal 23
conscientiously oppose. We will not disdainfullylabel them "brothers in error." Though they may bein error, even as all of us sometimes are. We acceptthem because they have been born into the samespiritual family. They are part of the body of Christbecause they have been saved from their sins.
The practice of non-sectarian Christianity alsorequires that our speech be non-sectarian. Sectarianlanguage reflects our thinking. The use of"church of
An issue-oriented the-ology often accompa-nies the sectarianspirit. When one ispreoccupied with reli-gious issues, his atten-tion ceases to be rivetedon the Lord.
Christ" to the exclusion of other equally biblicalterms identifying the family of God is a sectariansymptom. By choosing a single expression to describethe divine body, we convey a sectarian identity to ourneighbors which is the very thing we should not do ifwe wish to be non-sectarian. In using "church ofChrist" as a modifier of Christians, schools, andpreachers, we not only use poor grammar, but weemploy a Bible term unbiblically.
Ultimately, if we seek to be non-sectarian, ouridentity must be rooted in Christ. The vital questionis not, "What congregations do I fellowship?" but"What is my relationship to Christ?" One's rela-tionship with Christ must have precedence over hisassociations with fellow disciples.
The early Christian teachers saw the personand mission ofJesus as the heart of their faith. Theydid not just teach facts about Christ, but spoke ofhimas one with whom they enjoyed a personal relation-ship. Their message focused on Jesus; everythingelse was secondary. Paul declared, "When I came toyou, brethren, I did not come proclaiming to you thetestimony of God in lofty words or wisdom. For Idecided to know nothing among you except JesusChrist and him crucified" (1 Cor. 2:1.2).
Those with the sectarian spirit rarely focus onJesus. This is not to say they do not reverence him
4
Leaven, Vol. 2 [1992], Iss. 3, Art. 6
https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol2/iss3/6
24 Leaven, Summer1993
or preach about him. Rather, they donot make Jesustheir spiritual focal point. An issue-oriented theol-ogy often accompanies the sectarian spirit. Whenone is preoccupied with religious issues, his atten-tion ceases to be riveted on the Lord.
The non-sectarian ideal played a prominent rolein the early Restoration Movement. The plea toleave sectarianism to be just Christians motivatedthousands to take their stand for undenominationalChristianity. Unfortunately, the movement has inmany ways turned inward, focusing more on doctri-
nal correctness than on Christ. In the process lipservice has been paid to the non-sectarian plea bythose who have not understood its meaning.
The future of non-sectarian Christianity de-pends strictly on those who embrace it. If theproblem of sectarianism is rooted in the heart, thesolution is found by correcting the thinking to makeJesus preeminent in our faith. When we are awareof our own misunderstandings, we will then "lookto Jesus the pioneer of our faith" to help himremove our sectarianism.
5
Hawley: The Non-Sectarian Plea in Retrospect and Prospect
Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 1992