Reflecting on the One True Church

St. Augustine (354-430 A.D.), in his classic discussion On Baptism, made the following bold declaration: "There is no salvation outside the Church." Whether an individual agrees or disagrees with this assertion will largely depend upon his perception of the nature and identity of the "church." Many disciples have equated the church established by Jesus Christ [Matt. 16:18] with their own particular religious group or movement, each replete with its own unique history, creeds and set of cherished traditions. Almost every group within Christendom feels that it, and it alone, is the full embodiment of the "one true church" on planet earth.

The Roman Catholic Church, by way of a singular example, has long maintained that in order to be saved one absolutely must (no exceptions) be within the sacred parameters of their fellowship. "There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all is saved" [Pope Innocent III, 4th Lateran Council, 1215 A.D.]. Notice another papal pontification: "We declare, say, define and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff" [Pope Boniface VIII, Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302 A.D.]. Consider one more -- "The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and within the unity of the Catholic Church" [Pope Eugene IV, Bull Cantate Domino, 1441 A.D.].

Such radical exclusivism, however, is not confined to the Catholic Church alone. This kind of arrogance abounds throughout the religious world. Indeed, it's a part of the "dark side" of human nature. We have arrived, all others are not even close; We have all the answers, We perceive Truth perfectly, We practice the patterns precisely, all others are godless apostates and digressives. The "Churches of Christ" have gained a reputation over the years of believing (and even preaching) that We are the only ones who are going to heaven!! Yet, I have had some Baptists recently declare the very same thing to me about their group! Again, no one group has a monopoly on ignorance and arrogance. There is plenty to go around.

The reality is (and most within the parameters of Christendom would agree with this truth) there indeed is only one true church of our Lord Jesus. When Paul said, "There is one body" [Eph. 4:4], he meant it. Yes, there are many members of that universal One Body, and each of us differ from one another in many ways (some are feet, some hands, some ears, some eyes, etc.), but we are nevertheless one in Him. It is HE who binds us together as a cohesive whole. "We who are many are one body, for all of us share that one bread" [1 Cor. 10:17]. That "bread" is Jesus. "For the bread of God is He who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world" [John 6:33]. "I am the bread of life" [vs. 35, 41, 48]. It's not uniformity of conviction on a host of "weighty issues" that binds us together as one, for Paul has declared in Romans 14 that we may differ dramatically on any number of personal practices and perceptions and still be brethren in the Family of God. Rather, the Spirit unites us in Him, binding us together in love. ALL of those, whoever they are and wherever they may be found on earth, who are united with the Lord Jesus (who are in Him) make up the One Body (church). Thus, there is clearly only one church of our Lord. If you are in Him, then you are in it.

The problem we face is not with the above perception of the One Body universal (the "one true church"); the problem we face is that too many firmly believe (and pridefully promote) the position that they, and they alone, ARE exclusively that One Body universal. Yes, they will affirm, there IS only One Body ... and it's US! Thus, they equate their group or movement or faith-heritage, or some sub-sect or faction thereof, with that One Body. The result, and it is evident all around us, is a world filled with feuding factionists and squabbling sectarians, each claiming to BE the One True Church to the exclusion of everyone else on the face of the earth. When the Lord returns, He will return for them ... and then incinerate everyone else!! And deservedly, they might add, for these others were "not of us!!" I can't help but recall what John said to Jesus, "Teacher, we saw a man driving out demons in Your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us" [Mark 9:38, NIV; cf. Luke 9:49]. This sounds remarkably like some of US, doesn't it?! Maybe WE need to receive the same loving rebuke John received! Just because they are not "one of us," does NOT mean they are not one of HIS!! Oh, how we need to grasp this truth today!!

For example, John Waddey, in the August 1, 2009 issue of his publication Christianity: Then and Now, dealt with the problem of the numerical decline of the Churches of Christ. He gave several reasons why he believes we are not growing, one of which is: "A loss of faith in the Church of Christ as Christ's unique church." Thus, we have stopped trying to lead our neighbors out of "their manmade churches ... into the Lord's church." In other words, we've lost sight of the "fact," according to Waddey, that WE, and we alone, are THE one true church upon the face of the earth. In contrast, why were we growing in the opening years of the 20th century? Waddey enlightens us -- it is because our forefathers "loved the church and truly believed that she was the exclusive Church of Christ one reads of in the Scriptures." In other words, the one true church ... exclusively. Everyone else on the planet is lost; only WE have it all together spiritually. Again, what astounding arrogance (not to mention ignorance).

Being a part of the universal One Body of Jesus Christ is not conditioned upon being in uniformity with MY personal perceptions, preferences and practices; it is conditioned upon being in unity with HIM. You and I may have vastly differing worship traditions, for example, but that in itself has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not one or both of us are in or out of the Body. If you're in relationship with the Father through the Son, and I am in relationship with the Father through the Son, then we are spiritual siblings! You do not have to be my twin in order to be my brother! "God has called you into fellowship with His Son Jesus Christ our Lord" [1 Cor. 1:9]. You + Me = Our ... and the common denominator is not us, it is Him. Fellowship (a partnership of those who hold something in common) is in the Son, not in any of our perceptions about Him or our expressions of devotion to Him. Yes, I may be in association with, and indeed assemble with, other disciples who share similar spiritual perspectives and engage in similar worship practices, but these associations should never, ever be equated with the fullness of fellowship with the Father through the Son!! My association is with that wing of the Stone-Campbell Movement known as the "Church of Christ." My ancestors, as well as my wife's ancestors, were associated with this group. Thus, Shelly and I have chosen to remain with them because this is our faith-heritage. We do NOT confuse this association with our inclusion in the universal One Body of Jesus Christ, however. We are a part of the One True Church as a result of being in Him; we are a part of the group known as the "Church of Christ" as a result of a decision to associate with them as we labor for the Lord during our spiritual journey.

Patrick Henry, in a speech at the First Continental Congress (Philadelphia, October 14, 1774), stated, "I am not a Virginian, but an American." What was he saying here? Yes, he was indeed a Virginian; he was from Virginia, after all. However, he wanted people to know that his citizenship was broader than just a particular part of the whole. He was not just a Virginian, he was an American. In much the same way, my spiritual identity is based upon a much vaster reality than my association with that wing of the Stone-Campbell Movement denominated "Church of Christ" --- it is based upon my union with the Son of God Himself, which union has the added blessing of including me in His universal One Body, which is made up of everyone everywhere who is IN HIM. During my own personal journey through life I have made the commitment to serve my Lord in two primary areas: (1) to help those outside of Christ Jesus to come to know the joys of a relationship with the Father through the Son, and (2) to help those in a relationship with the Father through the Son to come to know the joys of a loving relationship with their fellow spiritual siblings. In seeking to accomplish the latter, countless barriers must be brought tumbling down; walls of exclusion must be systematically dismantled that have separated us far too long. It is for this work that I firmly believe my Lord has called and equipped me, and it is for this that I shall primarily labor each day until such time as He calls me to that blessed rest.

With this said, let me spend the remainder of this article expressing a few concerns about the most recent issue of the publication known as The Spiritual Sword [July, 2009]. The theme of this particular issue is: "A Handy Guide To Denominationalism." It doesn't take one long to discern that the editor and writers perceive "denominationalists" to be anybody and everybody but themselves. They are all in the "Church of Christ" group, which, of course, IS (exclusively) the One True Church universal on planet Earth (or, so they persist in believing). I have confronted thematic issues of this radically conservative, legalistic, patternistic publication before, as they consistently seek to promote the traditional tenets of Church of Christism, as though these all were in some way salvific, over the simple truth of salvation by grace through faith resulting in union with Him.

In the Editorial of the July, 2009 issue of The Spiritual Sword, the editor, Alan E. Highers, states the rationale behind this present issue -- it is to help those who "study the Bible with some denominational member" to have a much better understanding of the religious background of those with whom they study. In principle, I agree with this. If you're going to seek to share God's Word with someone, it always helps to have some awareness, and even appreciation, of where that person is coming from both culturally and theologically. This is an error missionaries sometimes make as they seek to "convert the heathen." I thought it was interesting that Alan Highers observed, "It will be very helpful to read a discussion of the history, origin, founding, and teachings of that particular movement before sitting down to a study with an individual who has been indoctrinated in that tradition. ... We believe it will be interesting to know the history and background of a movement as well as its distinctive teachings. Keep in mind, too, that many denominational members are not aware of their own history." Frankly, the same can be said of far too many within that wing of the Stone-Campbell Movement denominated "Church of Christ." The clear assumption of Alan Highers is that everyone else claiming to be a Christian is just part of a movement or denomination with its own unique history, teachings and traditions, but ... WE are not. Again, what arrogance. This is a blindness of staggering proportions.

Highers continues, "Some people are so accustomed to thinking in denominational terms that it has never occurred to them that one can obey the gospel, become a Christian, be added to the Body of Christ, be a member of the New Testament Church, yet never join any denomination, subscribe to any human creed, or wear any sectarian name." One of the things you will quickly notice when reading the writings of such people is that they will tend to focus primarily upon the "church" and its various identifying marks. Where in any of this is an emphasis upon union with Jesus Christ, the indwelling and empowering of the Holy Spirit, the matchless grace and mercy of God the Father in His daily interaction with His children? If our focus was more on HIM, and the relationship He has with His children through Jesus, we would come to realize that we have far more brethren around us than we will ever perceive when our focus is on delineating the countless differences between groups of spiritual siblings. Our focus is amiss, and the result is an increasing number of factions within the Family. In essence, we have become what might best be classed a fratricidal fellowship.

Highers observed, "The plea of churches of Christ, in fact, is for us to speak where the Bible speaks and to remain silent where the Bible is silent, to do Bible things in Bible ways, and to call Bible things by Bible names." Dear brethren, I have heard these trite clichés for most of my life, but I have yet to witness these tenets ever actually being applied. The stark reality is -- when the Bible is silent, that is when our legalists go to work assuming, deducing and inferring LAW. Frankly, if we ever literally did things exactly like they did them within the first century church (and which congregation are we going to "pattern" ourselves after?), these legalistic patternists would be the first to flee from the church building (which edifices they didn't even have back then). It never ceases to amaze me that otherwise intelligent men and women can buy into such a delusion. It just goes to show the power of the forces of darkness to deceive us when we take our eyes off HIM and shift our focus to US. The latter will invariably lead to an US - THEM separation, with US being the only ones right, the only ones who have it all figured out, the only ones saved. God help us!!

Beginning on page 43 of this issue of The Spiritual Sword, after a good many articles showing how flawed all the denominations are, Hugh Fulford, a man whom I greatly respect, and with whom I have had a good many email exchanges on this same topic over the years, including several in just the past few weeks, wrote an article titled, "Can We Be Undenominational?" Hugh, by the way, has been a gospel preacher for over 50 years, was a staff writer for Gospel Advocate under the editorship of B. C. Goodpasture, and now preaches in Tennessee. I certainly value this man and his devotion to the Lord. He and I differ, however, on our view of the nature of the church. In principle, Hugh and I are very much in agreement, and I would agree with the vast majority of what he wrote in his article. The problem, however, is that Hugh Fulford, like most of those who are of an ultra-conservative persuasion within our fellowship, has equated the group known as "Churches of Christ" with the universal One Body of Jesus Christ. Everyone else is a denominationalist; We are the one true church, and thus are UNdenominational. I have tried and tried to get Hugh to perceive this error, but to no avail. Thus, he continues to proclaim a noble truth in principle, while in actuality practicing just the opposite; sadly blinded to the dichotomy that is apparent to most disciples around him.

In his article, Hugh asks these very pointed questions: "Why do members of the church of Christ say that they do not constitute a denomination? Are we deceived in this matter? Are we denying reality? Is it really possible to be undenominational Christians?" Here one has to attempt to pin Hugh Fulford down on what exactly he means by the phrase "church of Christ" in that first sentence. If he means the universal One Body of Christ on earth, which is made up of ALL those individuals who are in relationship with the Father through the Son, then I would agree that THIS group does NOT constitute a "denomination" (as that term is typically understood). What Hugh would likely say is (and I base this upon my exchanges with him): Yes, he does indeed mean the universal One Body of Christ. However, Hugh Fulford would then equate that with the group known today as "Churches of Christ." Thus, if the former does not constitute a denomination, then neither does the latter, for, in his view, they are one and the same. Although there are some hardliners who still maintain this position, I think you will find that an ever increasing number within the Churches of Christ are finally coming to realize that although many within their fellowship truly are a part of the One Body universal, they, as a group, do NOT constitute that One Body universal in its entirety upon the face of this planet. Our Father has beloved children throughout this world, and these many children do NOT all assemble in buildings denominated "Church of Christ," nor do they all practice the same traditions or even share the same convictions on a host of matters. Nor do they have to! All that is truly essential is that they be IN HIM, and if that is true, then they are our brethren ... whether we choose to accept that fact or not.

The great reality is, and Hugh cannot seem to grasp this fact -- we can truly be "undenominational" in our walk with the Lord and yet still have different associations with various dear brethren who share our particular preferences for worship style, as well as sharing specific personal convictions (for example, on such matters as Bible classes, number of cups, versions, eating in the building, how to use the money in the treasury, etc.). It is perfectly acceptable for us to differ (there IS unity in diversity); it is NOT acceptable for us to sever fellowship over these differences. We can still be brethren, still all be members of that One Body universal, and yet assemble in groups where our individual needs are best met, and where we have the best opportunities to express our devotion to the Lord. For me personally, at this time in my journey, that is by being in association with the group denominated "Churches of Christ." I have been part of this faith-heritage all my life, and I know its teachings and traditions well, and many within this group know me (or know of me). This gives me a rather unique opportunity to perhaps have a positive impact on helping those within this movement to better grasp the beauties of family over faction, Truth over tradition, and relationship over religion. Progress in this direction is daily being made, and I intend to remain with this group, although I will never, ever restrict my fellowship to this little group alone. God's Family is much greater, much vaster, than any one small part of the whole (who may mistakenly view themselves AS the whole). My determination has been, and it shall continue to be, to keep on working with them to help them get beyond this devilish delusion. Hugh concluded his article by saying, "We once had a clear vision of undenominational Christianity. We need to recapture that vision!" Amen, brother! May we work together to achieve that noble goal.