United in the Spirit
My dear Pastorius, why do you think this decision is yours alone? Can we not discuss the matter, and find common ground? “Oh come come, Irritatous, you must stop pestering me; I’ve made my decision; and after all, how can we be one in the spirit unless you agree with me”?
I’ve heard the subject of “unity” preached so many times, with Ephesians 4:3 or Jn 17:20-23 used as the theological foundation to expand the idea that we must agree in unity to command a blessing from God. But what does this mean? Like me, you may have asked the question, why do we have to agree, to be united? If being united means agreeing then Christians will never command a blessing from God because it’s simply unrealistic. The argument has more to do with the everyday decisions of the Church and it’s about someone attempting to get their way by borrowing a passage about the body of Christ, to justify the decisions already made. Quite frankly, being united in Jesus Christ through salvation is all these texts are talking about, and the posturing about agreeing with each other, misrepresents the context. Further, disagreement will always exist, we will never agree on almost every subject in the Church, so this is one of those naive theological arguments that arise from manipulation.
Eph4:3 “giving diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as also ye were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in all.”
The phrase, “one in”, or being “united in” the spirit, suggests who we are united in. The basis of Paul’s teaching in Ephesians is an “objective” statement of unity in Jesus Christ. In other words, “unity” is about the person we are united in not agreeing on decisions between us. This one objective statement separates believers from the rest of the world. The fruit of this unity might be expressed in our love and respect for each other, as members of the same body, and in keeping the bond of peace. But producing fruit doesn’t define the meaning of unity either. I once listened to an Elder applauding the unity in their current leadership, and this was because they all agreed with each other. This view of unity is concerning because where Elders hold a position of spiritual authority, they should exemplify spiritual diversity unless they’re all the same.
Most commentaries refer to Paul’s teaching as “unity in diversity”. Diversity is a product of personality, character and gifting, especially the ministry gifts of Eph 4:11. These gifts are given, by God, for the specific purpose of building and maturing people, not specifically the management of brick and mortar. As such they will always view things from the diverse nature of their gifts. A natural consequence of this diversity is disagreement. These five gifts also provide a protective safeguard, because each gift is protected, balanced and enriched by the perspective of the other gifts. Many issues of disagreement are a direct result of singularly gifted people operating with unjustified authority. Unfortunately, Elders today are primarily selected on their availability, administrative talent, and relational compatibility, but this forms part of a much wider discussion about the role of Elders and the ministers of Eph4:11.
The opening parody illustrates the wordplay of a conversation that’s not a conversation. Its tone suggests that the decision in question, should not be challenged and implies the authority that made the decision shouldn’t be challenged either. The allusion to unity is manipulative because the real purpose is to force agreement. The authority demonstrated here is one we might expect in secular management. However, the Church should never be viewed as a democratic autocracy, because God instituted a theocratic body of interdependency, where every part serves the other, as if every other part, were “above them”. Those in the Church who hold a position that might be considered more senior, have an even greater responsibility to submit to those with spiritual gifts, they don’t possess. The idea of leaders being in submission might appear to undermine their authority, though necessary if a Church aspires to function as an interdependent theocracy, I’m not seeking to disparage anyone with a leadership role, but there are many examples of overbearing authority, where the coveting of power has destroyed a Church. Many generations have contributed to the current state of religious institutions, and if democratic systems remain intact the Church will continue to be little more than a religious institution. It may never mature beyond its rules and protocols. However, God will continue to love those who know him and speak to those who speak for him, but the power of God will never reside in administrations, buildings and religion. I understand there will be those who don’t see this, However, despite all this the evidence suggests the system is broken and eroding like the rust in the buildings themselves. We’ve incorporated religion into our spiritual lives to the point that we depend more on the institution than anything else. If you don’t believe me, ask yourselves, some hard questions about your faith, ask where I would be without my local Church. Or how would we cope without a Pastor to lead us? When these situations happen the state of spiritual inertia and despondency is exposed, and the feelings of vulnerability are real. The gradual decline and decay of the institution are visible. More and more Churches are reaching the point of financial and numerical collapse. But we continue to talk about agreement because it makes us feel good.
Phil 2:1 “If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2 then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose. 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. 4 Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.”
Here in Philippians “oneness” is defined in the spirit of relationship with Jesus Christ. We’re encouraged to be like him, and not to follow the vanity of idolatry. Disagreement itself doesn’t threaten this objective truth. The unity of the spirit is the knowing of Christ.
