In
order to deal with the roots of division we must know
what and where the roots are. They are only known by
their fruits, and are themselves so often unseen or
unrecognized. So we must go back to Corinth.
When
we look more carefully at that wretched state we find
that it resolves itself into divisions over things which
really were — and are — meant to constitute a
glorious unity, but which things were made evils by the
miserable spirit of Christians. That in itself is
something to take note of. The Bible is full of
paradoxes. Things which are at the same time demanded and
forbidden by God, things which are of great use against
the devil, being used by the devil against God. It is one
of the marks of Satan’s triumph at the beginning
that grand things have been taken into a realm where they
are of evil account and serve the devil’s ends.
Well, what were these things at Corinth which have grown
to such dimensions unto this time?
Persons — Ministries —
Functions
These
things were persons, ministries and functions
“…each one of you saith… Paul; and…
Apollos; and... Cephas; and... Christ” (1 Cor. 1:12;
3:4). “Wherefore let no one glory in men…
whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas” (ch. 3:21,22).
There was evidently something seriously enough wrong
about this personality matter to call forth rebuke and
castigation from the apostle. What was the wrong? It is
clear from Paul’s own admission that these names
belonged to men through whom the Corinthians had
believed. It would be very natural and unblameworthy if
those who owed everything spiritually under Christ to a
certain servant of His had a special and very great
regard for such a one. Indeed, elsewhere, Paul seemed to
use this very fact of his being a spiritual “father”
as a ground of appeal for a hearing. So that was not the
trouble. The element of human preferences no doubt got
near to the cause of rebuke. The preference for a certain
kind of man, or his particular ability, style, manner, or
matter, has often led to grouping of Christians even in a
great convention, and it has not been a far cry to the
creating of a group complex from such personalities, nor
yet to that forbidden “glorying in man”
mentioned above. But when we have said all that can be
said regarding such details we have been trivial compared
with the great background of it all. We have to remember
the great revelation of Jesus Christ which Paul possessed
and which governed all his approaches to situations, so
that there was nothing trivial or merely “human”
or “natural” with him. Paul’s mentality
was constituted by the one all-overshadowing revelation
of the one new-creation Man. While fully recognizing that
transformation is a process and conformity to Christ a
lifelong business, there were ever present with him
— as shown in all his writings — two basic
factors: one, that in Christ the old disrupted, divided
man is wholly put away and has no place, but a wholly new
Man, different and corporate is in being, a new creation
in very truth where there CANNOT be anything that
belongs to the havoc made in man or the race by the
devil. In Christ there cannot be Jew and Greek, etc.
(Col. 3:11), and the principle must be carried to many
more classifications than Paul mentions, seeing that the
divisiveness has worked out to such a much more numerous
progeny than existed then. “In Christ” there is
“one new man”, only one, and utterly new.
The
other thing with Paul was that there is a point at which
any merely natural or human features must definitely end,
and that period should be a VERY brief one indeed.
He calls it babyhood, and considers its extension beyond
a very short time something grotesque and abnormal. The
real trouble therefore was the bringing down of otherwise
heavenly things to earthly levels, the level of earthly
men: “Are ye not men?” and “...walk after
the manner of men” (1 Cor. 3:3,4). Even Christ is
taken hold of in this way. It may be that those who said,
“I am of Christ” thought that to be a degree
above the others, and looked down on them as inferior.
But they are classed with the rest in this matter of
divisions, for Paul comes back with a sounding slap:
“Is Christ divided?” Their use of Christ was
after the manner of men to give glory to their spiritual
(?) flesh. In his second letter Paul touched this at its
core. “Wherefore we henceforth know no man after the
flesh: even though we have known Christ after the flesh,
yet now we know him so no more” (2 Cor. 5:16). The
death-union with Christ just referred to takes this
matter of man’s place as such back to the very
beginning of the Christian life. So then, these divisions
are: —
a. A
mark of failure to apprehend the meaning of union with
Christ.
b.
Failure to apprehend the significance of Christ Himself.
c.
Failure to emerge from infant conditions.
It is
all a matter of still moving on the line of the first
man, Adam; a pulling everything down to that level.
“Are ye not men?” means not humans, but as men
in the disintegration of mankind, and not the integration
of the “one new man”. This is the kind of stuff
being put upon the foundation of Christ and its doom is
foreshown as going up in the flames and smoke of the
final judgment of works. Let it be fully recognized that
the “wood, hay and stubble” part of Paul’s
letter (1 Cor. 3:12) is connected with this whole
argument or corrective concerning divisions, and means
that to build upon Christ the predilections, preferences,
likes, dislikes, natural appraisals, prejudices,
partisanships, partialities, etc. of even Christian
people is to “be saved: yet so as by fire”.
This latter solemn warning has usually been used for
Gospel purposes, or for “worldly Christians” in
a general way, but its use by Paul was specifically
related to this matter of disunion by partisanship.
Then
we come to the question of ministries. There is every
reason to believe that ministry and ministries had a
large place in the Corinthian mentality. To read the two
letters with this thought uppermost is to be fully
convinced of the fact. Indeed, the letters can be said to
relate entirely, in the final issue, to the church’s
ministry. But here again the painful contradiction is
found. The very thing that was provided and intended for
building was being used for unbuilding; the means for
unifying and consolidating was being turned to divide and
disintegrate. We shall touch upon only one aspect of this
here.
The
root weakness and therefore the expressed evil was not
only the personal bias, i.e. the bias to persons, but to
ministries. There was distinct failure in the matter of
recognition of and rejoicing in the value and importance
of EVERY form of God-given ministry. The
evangelistic bias and preference would reject and
criticise the teaching ministry, and probably say, “There
is no gospel for the unsaved with him or with them.”
The teaching bias would take the attitude toward the
evangelistic that it was “elementary”, “not
feeding”, etc., and so despise it. Thus you go round
the clock to every aspect and emphasis of the whole
ministry, and people make ministries the means and ground
of divisive groups. This is pernicious in every case! Why
do not the Lord’s people recognize that what is true
of the Body as being one, yet having many members (1 Cor.
12:12), is also true of the ministry; it is one, yet
having many aspects. Why say of any, “I (or we) have
no need of you”? Then again, is it so inconceivable
that the Lord will raise up specific ministries in a
corporate way to be complementary to the other things
that He is doing? What is the reason for the suspicion
and ostracism existing in relation to ministries that the
Lord is undoubtedly blessing and using? Let us ask the
all-inclusive question regarding this: Is it really,
honestly, transparently, and utterly a jealousy that CHRIST
shall not lose anything, but rather that He shall
have all the increase in spiritual life that is
absolutely possible? Is it? Let us test ourselves
honestly before God!
If any
people in whose spiritual welfare we are interested could
really find more of Christ and grow spiritually more
fully and quickly in another circle of believers or under
another ministry, so that there would be a greater
measure of Christ in this world as represented by them,
are we willing and happy that they should leave OUR church,
mission, group, etc., and go there? Are we really ready
for the Lord to deal with ALL that limits Him in
us or our connection so that THE DRAW AND THE HOLD IS
HIMSELF?
Are we
trying to hold up, maintain, and conserve some THING that
is not clear, free, open, and adjustable for the
ever-growing fullness of Christ? It all amounts to a
question of whether the Lord really has sovereignly
ordained and determined our ministry. If He has, so long
as spiritual principles are not violated, it just must be
fulfilled, and “the gates of hell shall not prevail
against it”; but let us be sure that it is the gates
of hell against which we are warring and not the
come-back of a false conception and mentality as to what
the Lord is after!
Can we
not rejoice in ANYTHING that truly ministers
Christ, without an inward reservation born of fear as to
how it may affect OUR interests? Let us beware of
putting OUR hand upon the ark to preserve it
intact. The Lord will only confound us if we do.
When
we come to functions, we are only coming to an extension
of ministry. While the SPECIFIC ministries are
represented by the specific function (not offices) of
apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers,
the whole Body is brought into view as a ministering
Body. Every member is an organ and therefore has a
function. Interrelatedness and interdependence are the
laws of its ministry, and a vast diversity is in an
equally vast unity known as “the unity of the Spirit”
or “the fellowship of the Holy Spirit”. Thus,
the apostle gives much prominence to this great spiritual
truth in relation to the impact of the church upon the
world, just as did the Lord in John 17. All the strong
things said by the apostle about “not discerning the
Lord’s body”, and “destroying the temple
of God”, etc., are seen to have a corporate aspect,
and therefore involve the church in the question of its
world-testimony and impact. We just cannot say to any
real member of Christ, “We can do without you.”
Perhaps we would not SAY that, but do we act that?
Is ours a negative or a positive attitude? Surely what
Paul meant was “We just cannot do without you!”
“We must have you!” The need is not to maintain
some earthly thing with a Christian title, but for the
expression of Christ and His increase.