The Christadelphian January 1949, Islip Collyer

“The Strife of Tongues”

In our Brotherhood, one whose name becomes at all well known is sure to receive many unsolicited communications, letters, books and pamphlets. It is not humanly possible to read them all with anything approaching thoroughness, and such examination as one is able to give may often prove so disappointing that there is a temptation to make a quick repudiation without any adequate attempt to sift the wheat from the chaff. This is an unfortunate result, but a determination to avoid it might easily lead to still worse neglect. The world already contains far more good books than we can read. Every year produces another vintage, well worthy of attention, but presenting such bulk as to be quite beyond our powers of digestion. How then can we be expected to make diligent scrutiny of works that are thrust upon us, often so elaborated that even if there are a few ideas of value they are lost in a morass of words?

It may be asked why should anyone write at all on serious subjects if the ground has already been so well covered and the world is so well stocked with good books? The answer is that the need for honest, contemporary effort to help is all the greater for this literary fulness. We especially feel the need for an honest interpreter when we are surrounded by a shouting mob, especially when many of the ideas expressed are in an unknown tongue. Some who write regularly make no claim to present any epoch making discoveries. They have read thoroughly, they have thought constantly, and if they have taken ideas from other men they have made them so completely their own by meditation that they could not say from whence the first suggestion came, or how much it has been moulded and developed in their own minds. They may be interpreters rather than original thinkers. They believe that they can express thoughts that will help some readers, and sometimes they are rewarded by the discovery that such help has indeed been rendered. What better justification can there be for such modest literary effort?

If any writer is convinced that he has an epoch making discovery to present and it is vitally important for readers to know, let him come to the point as quickly as possible. Let his style be simple, vigorous, direct and arresting. Even when making no claim to reveal anything new and important, it is possible to make every sentence present a message of some kind, so that an intelligent reader can get something from it. How much more important it is that a revelation of vital significance should be expressed with such simplicity and vigour. There have been many teachers who have disguised feeble thoughts in cloudy language. It sometimes seems that they are more anxious to impress readers with the importance of the writer than to give the vital message.

Self-confident reformers are often too negative to inspire confidence. Sometimes when trying to read their work we are chilled by unfair criticism before we can be warmed by any helpful lesson. Long before we discover the real message of such a work, we are made painfully conscious of its antagonism. There have been some genuine reformers who have not fallen into this error. They have come to the point quickly and have given a message which all readers could understand, without any unnecessary pulling down or unhelpful condemnation. The word “reform” suggests the improvement of that which already exists rather than the presentation of something entirely new. It is very improbable that anyone in the world now can give us a message of any importance which is completely new and at the same time true, but there are many who may be able to give helpful criticism. There is nearly always some room for genuine reformers. Human nature continually tends to lose its grip of ideals and to sink to a lower level.

The Jews repeatedly fell into the error of putting the emphasis on forms and ceremonies, while they neglected the weightier matters of justice, mercy, faith and love. Some Christians have been just as faulty, either changing the Christian ceremonies to suit their convenience or rejecting them altogether, with a consequent repudiation of the basic truths which they represent. Baptism expresses the fundamental truth of our mortality, the fact that life is offered to a perishing world through Christ, and that we must be buried with him if we are to rise with him. The bread and wine, symbols of death and of life, express the great truth that Christ must be in us if we are to be members of the new creation. Just as literally as the bread and wine are taken into our bodies, so Christ must be taken into our hearts and minds, becoming the dominating influence in our mental make-up. Unfortunately, it is quite possible for men to submit to baptism and to partake regularly of the appointed emblems without any proper appreciation of what the symbols mean. If the basic truths are repudiated the ritual will not help.

In our Brotherhood many reforms may be desirable, but there must be no loosening of our grip on the essential truths we have apprehended or any neglect of observances which have been commanded. We are right to insist on baptism and no change must be permitted in the symbol, but there is room for improvement in our understanding of the truth it expresses, especially in the idea of being dead to sin and walking in newness of life. We are right to partake of bread and wine on the first day of the week after the example of the apostles. We must not change or neglect the symbols, but we do well to increase our appreciation of the need to take Christ into our minds and hearts. We are right to insist on the regular reading of Scripture, but this will not be of much value unless we allow it to have the effect at which the Spirit aims in weaning us from the world and transforming our characters. We are right to insist on separation from the world, but while we can judge for ourselves as to the exact place where the painful excision must be made, we cannot well judge for others. We might indeed be gravely at fault in making such an attempt. We might root up many tares and much of the wheat with them, but however industrious we might be in this unlawful task, many tares will still remain for the judgment of the Lord. We might even add to the number by these forbidden activities.

Perhaps some zealous reformers might ask: “In writing thus about wheat and tares, do you suggest that we should never withdraw from offenders?” The answer is “No”. One who accepts all Scripture could not make such a suggestion. There are some explicit instructions to withdraw from offenders. This surely was the meaning of the Lord’s judgment on the man who persistently refuses to hear the appeals of a brother he has wronged, or of several who support that appeal, or finally of the Church as a whole. The apostle ordered withdrawal from the Corinthian fornicator, and from men who refused to work. There is also the suggestion in 1 Tim. 6 that strife of words may become such perverse disputing of men of corrupt minds that withdrawal from such becomes necessary. There could be no spiritual development if the perverse disputing continued unchecked. This has been proved by practical experience in our own time.

But while it is sometimes necessary to withdraw from the disorderly, we ought surely to realize that the excommunication of any member is such a serious act that it should only be taken when there is a clear Scriptural call. We should make a grave mistake if we supposed that we could commend ourselves to the Lord by being severe in our rules for the conduct of others. It may be legitimate to go beyond the Scriptural commands in imposing severe restrictions on ourselves, although even in that matter there is danger that the establishment of unnecessarily rigid rules in any direction may lead to lack of balance, possibly producing a worse evil in matters which have evaded our scrutiny. But while it may be permissible for men to be severe with themselves, they do wrong if they attempt to impose the drastic rules on others. If they go still farther and make such matters a test of fellowship, they run grave danger of cutting themselves off, for it is written, “He shall have judgment without mercy that hath showed no mercy”.

I.C.