Walter J. Chantry. "Introduction," in Today's Gospel: Authentic or Synthetic? The Banner of Truth Trust, 1970. pp. 9-18.
While written in 1970, Chantry's book brings a timely message to evangelical Christians in 2020. I do recommend the book in its entirety but would like to draw out, in particular, one lengthy quote from the "Introduction."
"In his honest search for God's power to return to the preaching of today, evangelicals have been making some crucial errors. Those who believe in God's Word have been grasping at the same superficial solutions that liberalism has adopted. Relevance, respectability (whether intellectual or social), and especially unity have become the aims of God's people with the hope that these will revitalize a weakened church.
'If only all Bible-believing people join together the world will sit up and listen,' thinks the church. Let's merge our mission boards to pool our funds and our personnel. Let's join giant evangelistic projects. If every evangelical joins in a common organization, we can have greater depth of evangelism. Thus organizational unity becomes the aim of Gospel churches.
Having accepted the theory that unity is all-important for world evangelism, both the church and the individual must lower their estimate of the value of truth. In a large congress on evangelism we could not offend any brother evangelical. Thus we must find the lowest common denominator to which all born-again Christians hold. The rest of the Bible will be labelled [sic.] 'unessential' for missions. After all, unity (among Christians) is more essential than doctrinal preciseness.
It is for just this reason that the mission societies have been unwilling carefully to examine the root problem in preaching. Mission boards are hesitant to answer the question, 'What is the Gospel?' Thoroughly to answer that would condemn what many of their own missionaries preach. It would destroy the mission society, which is a federation of churches who have differing answers to that question. To adopt the position of one church would be to lose the support of five others. The whole system built on unity and generality would crumble.
The local church may not get too specific about truth either. It may affect its harmony with the denomination or association. To define the Gospel carefully will bring conflict with the organizations working with teen-agers [sic.]. It will prompt irritating problems with mission boards. . . . Giving too much attention to the Gospel will mean friction with other evangelicals. And unity is the key to success" (10-12, bolded emphasis mine).
What do you think?
Hearing someone frown at unity as an emphasis is shocking. But is Chantry correct? Have we supplanted truth with unity?
In the 70s he saw a trend within evangelical circles to rely on the liberal methods of their day. Is the church in 2020 guilty of the same?
To be sure, Chantry is right, "No sincere Christian intends to deceive sinners. In love for souls, true evangelicals invariably present some profound truths in their witnessing" (17). I do believe the emphasis on unity comes from sincere believers. "Yet," once again to borrow Chantry's words, "By the unconscious omission of essential ingredients of the Gospel, many fail to communicate even that portion of God's Word which they mean to convey. When a half truth [sic.] is presented as the whole truth, it becomes an untruth" (17). Sincerity and zeal are not the standards of truth.
Some of the untruths are subtle; others more overt. For example, I've seen some conversations regarding racial reconciliation (among Christians) call for objective responses that don't use the Bible. Give me something objective. Not subjective. But do so without referencing the Bible. Here's the problem. The Bible provides the only basis for absolutes for standards of justice. Yet, I ask: How can we move to the practical without first clarifying the principle? Andrew Fuller stated correctly, "Holy practice is built on holy principle." The Bible is sufficient. Lest we forget. It is the objective standard for understanding Christain unity. We have made pragmatic responses to the Gospel principles more difficult than we need. Some ask: "What does love thy neighbor look like?" "What do I do?" Remember Jesus's words in the Sermon on the Mount? Matthew 7:12, "So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets."
From my vantage point, the heightened concern regarding racial reconciliation has renewed an emphasis on unity as the aim of the gospel rather than a byproduct or necessary end of the gospel. Please don't hear me disparaging the heightened concern for racial reconciliation and equality. To be sure, I think racism is a gospel issue. But I also believe the Bible is the only foundation and basis for such equality, a principle lost in our culture and perhaps abandoned by some evangelicals. Colossians 3:5-10 offers no other conclusion than the posture of racial equality in Christ. Racism has no place in the Christian life. It must be "put to death" and "put away" along with the other earthly pursuits and self-promotions. Paul calls the Christain to "put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator."
From this principle of being renewed after the image of our creator, Jesus Christ, Paul said, "Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all" (Col. 3:11).
I can't help but notice at least one staggering difference between the context of Chantry's "Introduction" and the context of churches in 2020. A host of evangelical leaders today seem to be willing to compromise regarding the truth in order to pursue unity with fellow evangelicals. This alone is problematic. But perhaps a situation similar to Chantry's. A number of evangelicals seem willing to go a step beyond that with a willingness to redefine cobelligerents as allies in the kingdom. Evangelicals must remember that when the world and the church agree on social issues it is as cobelligerents and not as allies. Maintaining the distinction is vital when working for the same end (whether that is to promote racial justice, defend the life of the unborn, and so forth). We must never compromise the truth of the Gospel to appease either dissenting opinions of evangelicals or unbelievers. Soon you may find that you're unified around the lowest common denominator and not the truth of Jesus Christ.
Philippians 2:1-5, one of the clearest calls for unity in the New Testament, says,
1 So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, 2 complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. 3 Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. 4 Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. 5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,"
Paul emphasizes the need for Christians to have unity, humility, and selflessness. But how are they to be unified, humble, and selfless? They must do so with the mind of Christ. "This mind" (one unified, humble, and selfless) is yours in Christ Jesus.
5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,
True Christian unity comes as a result of being reconciled to God through Jesus Christ not the other way around.
Disclaimer: Link in this post to Amazon is an affiliate link, which means this blog receives a small commission when you click the link. Doing this helps us to cover our costs (at no cost to you), enabling me to continue recommending resources. Thank you.
コメント