My brother (Dave Hayton) recently mentioned something which relates to this topic. He said that what separates us should be what defines us. And so, we are defined by what we separate over. Let the body of Christ understand this point, if we separate fellowship based on petty differences of personality, church polity, or items of clear secondary importance like baptism or denominational affiliations, we are defining ourselves by something much less than the central thrust of the Christianity revealed in the NT. Love for brothers, and love for Christ, manifested in radical missions and radical support of both the brethren in need, and those who are destitute and without Christ is what gave the early church its clear identity in sharp contrast to the world. I shudder, when I think that so many would rather be defined by particular interpretations and applications of clearly secondary importance (like KJV only, pants-on-women, alcohol, local church ecclesiology, etc.) than be defined by a radical love for one another, that Christ prayed for in Jn. 17. May Rom. 15:5-7 be a rallying cry for the church to get over our differences and unite around Christ that Rom. 15:16b and Acts 1:8 might be realized.

Some might have difficulty with this post, though. They may see unity despite of differences, or “welcoming” brethren despite contradictory practices and beliefs, as some kind of threat to the call for a defense of the faith. A desire to stand on what is true is certainly commendable, but we see both in the history of the Spirit’s work in creating unity in the widespread body of Christ, and in Scripture itself a clear emphasis on retaining unity and working for purity rather than a knee-jerk response of separation and denounciation. Paul separates from clear apostates only with tears, and when we are admonished to separate from disobedient brethren, we are exhorted to treat them like a brother (2 Thess. 3:6-15). How do you treat your brother? Close, and like a friend, right? That should be the way separation is carried out, in a loving way, which by no means closes the door on “fellowship in the gospel” (Phil. 1:5). A great resource along these lines, is the recent series of messages Pastor John Piper preached on Romans 14. Links are available to free audio and print copies of these sermons here.

Again, thanks Nathan (Pitchford) for the post.

As in other reformations of the church, a reformation of unity will still cause division (ironically enough). There will be those that stubbornly hold to an earthly ideal over biblical missionology. Again ironically, an obsessive hold on a misunderstanding of “love” will be one of these ideals, just as much as an unhealthy adherence to “purity.” This is the task, then, to teach in our churches what is biblical and what is man-conceived emotionalism. There is a middle ground that recognizes error while loving our brothers as Christ does.

I hope that this will not be one of the posts that we skip over in our thinking in favor of a more controversial one. Thanks Pitchford.