Editorial
November/December, 1977
Volume 12, Number 6
In the matter of separation from one’s denomination, there are many gray areas where we may easily let personalities, prejudices, and extraneous activities determine our decision. On the other hand, separation from the denomination seems justifiable when the Church in its official doctrinal statements opposes the Gospel and refuses to repeal its errors, or when the Church compels the Christian to believe or to do things that are contrary to the Word of God. If the denomination does not violate these few basic principles, then it seems better not to reject it, even if it has many faults.
One who decides to stay within the denomination is aware of the fact that there is no absolutely pure and perfect visible church. Only perfect people would result in a perfect church, and there is no such body because there are no such people. Those who feel they are going to find a paradise in another denomination, are likely going to be in for a surprise. One must beware of thinking that all his problems will be solved and that everything will be perfect in a “new field of activity.” In fact, without exception, those who have separated from apostate bodies, in the course of time are themselves faced with doctrinal defection. Thus separation is an endless chain that never really settles doctrinal departures.
Those who stay in the denomination must accept the limitations as well as the opportunities entailed in working in constant tension with programs largely directed by religious liberals. One’s witness may not always be effective. There will be tensions and frustrations. It would be easier to look for another church in which the views would parallel our own. But while some say that it doesn’t help to stay in and “let your light shine,” nor to stay in and “put on the brakes” — this writer has seen some concrete examples of ways in which it has helped to stay within the denomination and confront its members with the truth.
It is easy to live among those with whom we can agree. But it may be more important to stand for the truth among those who don’t have the truth (or who misunderstand it). The Christian armor described in Ephesians 6:11-20 has no protection for the back. Apparently the Lord never calls for retreat. As a result, many have decided to stay within the denomination and contend for the faith in a Christ-like manner, to be patient about what cannot be changed immediately, to work hard at what can be changed, and to always keep an ear tuned for the commands issued by our Lord Jesus Christ in the Word of God.
An Apostate Denomination:
Stay in or Leave?
by Harold S. Martin
Down through the years the issue of leaving the church and separating from apostasy has been a live one — and it is still very much alive today. What shall we do when we find ourselves within a denomination where some church leaders deny the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ?
There are men in our pulpits who do not believe or accept the basic tenets of the Christian faith. There are many teaching in our colleges who do not uphold the faith of our fathers. There are some in the official employ of the Church of the Brethren who are not faithful to biblical standards. These are facts which need not be documented in this paper.
Can a faithful Christian remain in a denomination having the above characteristics? Can he send his children to Sunday School classes where Scriptural principles are often ignored or distorted? How far should we fraternize with those who have turned aside to another gospel?
The problem is not really a new one. There has been genuine concern about the purity of the church among believers down through the centuries. The Montanists were a group who became concerned very early in the history of the church. They were orthodox in their doctrine, emphasized the importance of the Holy Spirit, and taught the priesthood of all believers. Tertullian was their chief theologian. In succeeding centuries, there were the Donatists and the Novatianists. In the time of the Reformation, there was Martin Luther, Felix Manz, and Alexander Mack. All of these men struggled with the issue of whether or not to stay within the larger body.
Many advocate the “umbrella principle” of “unity in diversity,” and say that sincere Christians should continue in the denomination to help turn the tide and bring the church back once more to honor the Lord. Others say that fellowship with those who advocate known error, is participation in sin, and thus they urge finding fellowship with a church that is loyal to the Scriptures and to our Anabaptist heritage. They say that to affiliate with those in error, is disobedience to the Word of God — and God does not bless disobedience.
1. PRINCIPLES FOR SEPARATION FROM THE DENOMINATION
One cannot rub against a smutty stove without getting some of it on him. If we hobnob with those who are doctrinally unfaithful, and if we enter into dialogue with them, some of their thinking is likely to rub off on us. Staying in among people who are drifting spiritually may tend to cause us to compromise.
The following statements set forth some principles that are used to argue for separation from the denomination.
(1) The teaching of 2 Corinthians 6:14-1 7
This passage is often said to be a direct commandment of the Lord to separate from a church that has become unfaithful. Even the noted scholar, Charles Hedge, says that the separation called for here, is primarily a prohibition against association with the heathen. But, he says, it has a wider application. The believer is forbidden ultimate fellowship with all the enemies of God.
To appeal to 2 Corinthians 6:17 (“Wherefore, come out from among them, and be ye separate”), in defense of separation from a church body, may however be an over-simplification of the issue. On the other hand, the prohibition is not only against complicity with the commercial world, but also with the ecclesiastical world.
(2) The commandments to prohibit heresy
The word “heresy” speaks of any school of thought which is contrary to the recognized, fundamental, historic doctrines of the Christian faith. Throughout the New Testament, heresy is condemned, and believers are told to separate themselves from heretics. False apostles had established themselves in the congregations of the early church. However, the separation from heretics (which was called for in the New Testament) — was not to be accomplished by the believers’ withdrawing from the church, but by the expulsion of the heretic (Galatians 1:8-9; Titus 3:10-11). Those who are apostates (an “apostate” is one who has abandoned the essence of the faith) should be corrected, or else purged from the body.
(3) The meaning of Revelation 18:4
Some argue strongly that Rev. 18:4 is a clear New Testament call for separation from apostate churches. However, the call in (Revelation 18:4) to “come out” is a call to separate from the vanity and greed and materialism of the whole commercial system (known as “Babylon”), and described in Rev. 18:5-24. The religious system had already been destroyed in Revelation 17:6.
The context of Revelation 18:4 indicates that Babylon is here viewed in its political and economic character, rather than its religious aspect;. We read later on in the chapter, that industry and trade will come to a standstill, the voice of the musicmaker will become silent, the craftsman (who manufactured expensive furnishings) will no longer be found, the night-life of earth’s great cities will vanish away, and the streets will no longer ring with the voices of laughing people. Man’s achievements will some day fall, and will give place to the city of God, which shall stand forever. The call in Rev. 18:4 is a plea not to become entangled in the commercial and materialistic system which will utterly collapse at Christ’s Second Coming.
Many who decide to separate from the denomination are sincere persons, and should not be considered fanatical, self-righteous, and foolish. Some say that separation from a denomination is evil, but we must remember that unfaithfulness to the truth of God is yet more evil. If one insists that loyalty to a denomination is correct and that separation from a denomination is alruays wrong, then Alexander Mack was wrong, and the Lutheran and Reformed churches were right, and we should all repent and return to the state churches.
If one does decide however to separate from a denomination, he must guard against separatism. The word “separatism” is a term that denotes the attitude of those who leave their church prompted by a wrong spirit. The motive which prompts some departures is based upon personality conflicts, more than it is upon concern about doctrinal matters. The New Testament condemns all unnecessary schism (1 Corinthians 1:10-13; 1 Corinthians 11:18-22; Galatians 2:12).
Separation from the denomination should be motivated by love — love for Christ, love for the truth, and love for peace. The aim should be to find a place where the Word is preached, the ordinances are observed, and where discipline is exercised. There may come a moment when believers must say, “We can no longer stay in the denomination with a good and clear conscience. We still love our Church, but we believe that it has become so immersed with error that we can no longer stay within and maintain a clear conscience.”
2. PRINCIPLES AGAINST SEPARATION FROM THE DENOMINATION
One who decides to stay in a corrupted denomination believes the situation is never so hopeless that it cannot be improved. He believes (at least in theory) that the church can be and should be reformed. He prefers to remain within the old-line denominations, partly in the hope that there may come a turn in direction toward the historic faith, and partly because he has found within the denomination freedom to proclaim the Gospel and freedom to observe the ordinances as ordained by our Lord.
The following statements set forth some principles that are used to argue against separation from the denomination.
(1) The attitude of the prophets
The Old Testament prophets, in spite of the terrible corruption among the people of God, never separated from that body in order to establish a separate sect. The prophets lived in a time similar to ours. Israel had strayed from the faith of the fathers and had aligned themselves with the pagan nations around them. They adopted the practices of heathen people, yet God commanded the prophets not to withdraw, hut to go to Israel and preach fearlessly even though they were stubborn and not eager to hear (Ezekiel 3:4-9).
Jeremiah speaks of the prophets who prophesy falsely, and the “people love to have it so” (Jer. 5:30-31). He was called to witness to these people who loved falsehood. Should Jeremiah have withdrawn?
(2) The concept of the remnant
The Old Testament people were preserved in the faithful remnant, and so (the argument says) true believers have a duty to preserve the church today by staying in it.
There was a “remnant” throughout the history of Israel. The “remnant” speaks of “a spiritual Israel within the national Israel.” In Elijah’s time, seven thousand had not bowed the knee to Baal (1 Kings 19:18). In Isaiah’s time it was the “very small remnant” for whose sake God stayed the destruction of the nation (Isaiah 1:9). During the Captivities, the remnant appeared in Jews like Esther, Mordecai, Daniel and his three friends, etc. At the time of our Lord’s first advent, John the Baptist, Anna, Simeon, and “those who looked for redemption in Jerusalem” (Luke 2:38) comprised the remnant.
The true believers stayed within the household of faith, and it was the task of the faithful remnant to bear witness against the apostate nation and call it back to the Lord and His message. In the New Testament, 1 Timothy 4:1, 2, 6 tells us that some will depart from the faith. Timothy’s responsibility was to stay in the church and warn the brethren of error.
(3) The example given in Revelation 2:24; 3:4
Revelation 2 and 3 tell about the idolatry and formalism and error within many of the churches, but at least twice in these chapters we are reminded that some in the midst of the apostasy had not compromised their convictions. John says (in Revelation 2:24) that some in Thyatira “have not this doctrine” (even though they were inside the wicked church); in Revelation 3:4, he speaks about the church at Sardis, and says, “Thou hast a few names even in Sardis who have not defiled their garments.”
There was, within each of the above-named churches, a group of believers which continued in the faith and had not been deceived by “Jezebel.” Our Lord (through the Apostle John) tells them to “hold fast till I come” (Revelation 2:25). Jesus himself (at His coming) will deliver faithful believers out of the apostate setting.
It is significant that Jesus did not separate from the synagogue, nor did the apostles separate from the faltering congregations of their day. At Corinth there were all kinds of problems — personality clashes, sexual looseness, Christian freedom confused with license, turmoil at the lovefeast services, and a group which taught that there was to be no resurrection. The easiest choice for Paul would have been to “come out from among them” — but instead, he rebuked them, prayed for them, and visited their church. Paul did not quit Corinth, bad as it was.
Should sound-minded conservative people separate from the wandering denomination and thereby strengthen the hands of the liberals? Or should conservatives stay in and try to strengthen an evangelical power base to counter the trends? God has worked both ways to reform the church. He has sometimes blessed those who stayed within to confront, and sometimes He has blessed those who separated and started anew.
My own conclusion (after much heart-searching and Scripture-study) is that it is not necessarily the duty of the Christian to withdraw from a denomination somewhat influenced and harmed by the new theological looseness. Many a faithful Christian has remained in such a church, teaching a Sunday School class of children or adults, quietly witnessing to the whole Word of God, and has been used of God as an antidote to the wrong or confused teachings which are often accepted there. It is almost always possible to find other true believers with whom one may have fellowship in such a congregation. On the other hand, each person in his own heart must be fully persuaded about his course of action.
We acknowledge too, that conditions vary so much, that a course of action which may be right for one person, could well not be God’s will for another. Our decision to stay or to separate should follow very definite prayer for God’s leading with a request to the Lord that we be kept from allowing personalities and prejudices to color our decision.
