Building Fences and Drifting

The Pharisees were a concerned sect of the Jews, desiring to maintain proper service before God. Without going into detail, I think we realize that they were off the mark, at least in part, due to their building of fences around the law of God. They probably would have said that those who did not wash their hands according to the tradition of the elders were surely drifting away from God (cf. Matt. 15). They made the mistake of putting their traditions on par with, or even above, God’s word. Of course, they had their reasons for believing and doing what they did. They could have argued their case. They probably could have quoted and referenced Scriptures they thought supported their views. But they were wrong. Saying that they were right proved nothing.

It is disturbing to me to see what some brethren are calling “drifting.” I don’t deny that actual drifting occurs, but the "drifting" of which I speak is not a matter of what God’s word actually teaches; it is a matter of local church autonomy and judgment; many are matters of personal judgment. What is being chastised as drifting has to do with what churches decide within their own right and within the boundaries of what God’s word teaches.

I read an article in which the writer called into question congregations that had decided to meet only once on Sundays. “What reason would justify such a decision?” he asked. The paragraph began with speaking of some “churches of Christ” that have decided to “abolish Sunday evening worship service.” He put “churches of Christ” in quotes, which, by the nature of such calls into question their standing as churches that belong to Christ. Among the questions asked is, “How could our choosing to worship our Creator less, be pleasing to Him?” After a series of such questions and responses, the article ends with, “Brethren, we are drifting!”

Drifting from what? The arguments are filled with illogical and unreasonable insinuations. It is disrespectful to the autonomous nature of local congregations, each of which has unique reasons and circumstances that may call for differing actions on their part (note: I said “differing,” not unbiblical). The writer says, “I know that God has not commanded his children to assemble more than once on the first day of the week.” Fine. Case closed. What right then does he or anyone else have to say that doing something that is not a matter of God’s commandments (by his own admission) is “drifting”? That kind of “preaching” is completely out of line. It is anything but “gospel” preaching!

If, by deciding to worship only once on Sunday instead of twice, we are displeasing God by worshiping “less,” then why aren’t all congregations (and the one of which this brother is a part) worshiping even more than twice? Why not three times? Four times? Surely God is not pleased with us choosing not to worship even more than we do (I speak as this brother would seem to reason). Surely we can see the folly of this.

Meeting more than once on a Sunday is a matter of judgment. When judgment matters are decided differently by various people or groups, by what logic or right may we say that they are drifting? Drifting from what? The tradition of the “elders”? Such fence-building is itself drifting from the word of God (as Jesus Himself pointed out in Matt. 15). We have no right to call into question the spirituality, the commitment, or anything else relative to their relationship to God simply because they do something differently from what our judgment would be. If a passage can be produced showing that such is against God’s will, then let it be shown. If it cannot be, then may God silence such attempts to bind where He has not. God has not commanded it, but some brethren apparently do.

The same may be said about the “name” put on the sign of a church building. Another article (actually, many such articles) chastises churches who “change its name” from the “church of Christ” to something else (and I am not talking about unbiblical names here!). If, in its local autonomy, a congregation decides that it is expedient to put on the sign “Christians meet here” or “The church” or something else that is, in fact, under the guidelines of God’s authority, then what right does anyone else have to say they are drifting or somehow ashamed of the church? The writer asks, “Does this not indict those who do not change their names…?” No. Why would it? My choosing to homeschool my children does not indict parents who send theirs to public schools. If I choose to ride my bike, does that indict those who don’t? Such an argument has no sound basis. It’s saying that because someone does something differently from me (remember, we are talking judgment matters here), then that means he is condemning me if I don’t do it like him. But that does not follow at all.

Preachers will often say that “church of Christ” is not exclusive as a name, but then react harshly when a congregation actually decides to put something else on a sign. When a congregation, in its autonomy, decides to put up a sign that does not violate Scripture, then again, I ask, what right does anyone have to call into question their commitment to the Lord? We have no right to view them suspiciously, as if they are ashamed of the church because they opted for another scriptural way of doing something. Again, there may be circumstances and reasons they have – and they do not need to justify such a decision to the “brotherhood” at large!

Another article chastises churches that would make a change to their sign. Since Paul was not ashamed to say “churches of Christ” in Romans 16:16, then neither should we. So goes the argument. But neither was Paul ashamed to call churches by other descriptions. And neither should we. The writer speaks with disdain against those who would just call themselves “the church at _____.”  He intimates that those who make such a change are not respecting the authority of Christ in all things. By what right may he or anyone else make such a charge? Given the fact that Paul himself referred to “the church of God which is at Corinth” (1 Cor. 1:2), “the churches of Galatia” (Gal. 1:2), “the church of the Thessalonians” (2 Thss 1:1), etc., then a congregation is as authorized to employ such a phrase as they are to employ “church of Christ” (which, incidentally, is not used in the singular anywhere). Suggesting that this is in violation of authority demonstrates that tradition and fence-building have become more important than what the Bible actually teaches or says. And that is an example of drifting from truth! It is, in fact, denominational thinking to the core. When we cannot accept biblical options without feeling like people are drifting, then we have, ironically, drifted from truth.

Yet another article in circulation chastises the idea of 15 or 20 minute sermons. This brother is greatly disturbed, fillled with “perturbation,” and emotionally upset when he hears of experienced men preaching only 15 or 20 minutes. He doesn’t see how such sermons could have any good content to them. He then argues against sermons being filled with cute stories instead of Scripture. Granted, sermons should not be filled with cutsie stories. They should be scriptural to the core, no matter how short or long they are. But there is no relation here to the length of the sermon and the scriptural content. I wonder how long it takes to read Peter’s sermon in Acts 2, or Paul’s sermon in Acts 13, or Stephen’s in Acts 7 (the longest in Acts). None of these are long. Would they make good sermons for “our” pulpits? Or would they be chastised for being short and therefore devoid of content? What scripture can this or any other brother produce that demands a particular length to a sermon? Just how long is a good sermon? Show me the Scripture! Again, such demonstrates commitment to tradition, not the Bible. Anyone who makes such demands has overstepped biblical authority. It is, again, drifting from truth for the sake of tradition.

Again, what bothers me is that what we sometimes think of as “drifting” really has to do with judgment calls by autonomous groups. This alone is a sign, again, of drifting from the word of God! But I’m afraid we don’t see that. We don’t see that our own fence-building is itself a drift from truth. We don’t see how wrapped up we can be with preserving the tradition of the past, when such a tradition may simply be a judgment matter. No, anyone suggesting that “another way” can be expediently used according to God’s authority is chastised as drifting and desiring to be a “change agent” in the church. No matter that book, chapter, and verse can be found for it. No matter that brethren who bind their traditions cannot find God’s commandments to do such. It is different from our tradition, and that makes it wrong. God doesn’t demand something in this case, but some brethren do. Yes, we are drifting.