Changes in the Church
Reprinted from The Carolina Messenger
David R. Pharr

Much is being said and written regarding change in the church. We have continued to express our dismay and have cited biblical warnings against changes which would in the slightest move us away from the pattern of true Christianity. As long as God permits it, we intend to keep on "warning every man and teaching every man" (Col. 1:28). Unscriptural winds of change must not be allowed to blow freely through the brotherhood.

The idea of "change," however, covers a wide spectrum, including both things that are legitimate and things that are unlawful. Some innovations are no more than scriptural expedients, but other innovations are unscriptural digressions. Some changes are merely adjustments to fit current cultural and circumstantial needs. We are on guard, however, against changes that are violations of Divine principles. It is essential that we recognize the differences.

There can be no fellowship with that which changes the apostolic order. The warning in II John 9 is against going beyond the doctrine of Christ. What in the minds of some is "progress," or "moving ahead," may be actually transgression. If we become so progressive that we leave the doctrine of Christ, we are no longer in fellowship with the Lord. Further, we are forbidden to bid "God speed" to any who are of that kind of progressive spirit.

On the other hand, it is equally important that we not oppose as a doctrinal issue those changes which are strictly in the realm of human judgment. Notice our emphasis on the error of treating such things as doctrinal issues. We might have good reasons for differing as to the wisdom of changing certain things. We might even consider them as so unwise that we could not in good conscience accept them. However, things that are truly only matters of human judgment must neither be advocated nor opposed on doctrinal grounds—that is, when no such doctrinal grounds exist. It is presumption to bind laws which God has not bound. We must be as cautious against sins of presumption as we are against sins of digression (Deut. 18:20; Psa. 19:13).

Confusing the Issues

Some of the changes being promoted today are unquestionably departures from the New Testament norm. And while we want to be careful not to judge motives, it seems evident that there are some efforts to camouflage these departures behind claims that they are only innocent methods and procedures being adapted to present day culture and needs. We have noticed that in much of what is said about the need for change there is very little that is specified. Instead there are generalities about culture, "moving into the twenty-first century," and how that the "methods" of the 1950's won't work today. All of this may seem harmless enough, but when this song has been played enough, when enough people are sufficiently persuaded of the obsolescence of our "tired old methods," and when the climate is hot for change: some of the changes that slip in may in reality be departures from the faith. The point I am making is that all reasonable people recognize that there are legitimate changes that must be made to keep in step with changing circumstances; but at the same time I am concerned that too much fanning of the flames of change can create a wildfire—a conflagration which will blacken and even consume the identity of the church.

The other side of confusion, however, is in irrational opposition to all change. We must not assume that every call for change is a call for unscriptural change. It is overkill to label every change as apostasy, and the thing that gets killed may be the very church we are trying to protect. Commitment to the restoration ideal does not mean insisting on "the way we have always done it," as though our customs are in themselves the biblical standard. We are bound to conform to the Lord's pattern. We are not bound to maintain what admittedly must be no more than customs to which we have become comfortably accustomed. Unless we are so arrogantly foolish to think that we are perfect, we must recognize that there must be ways in which we can improve how we do things. Likewise, and certainly more importantly, we must always be open to the possibility that there may be changes that are needed to make us more in harmony with God's ideal for the church as it is shown in the Scriptures.

Judgment or Good Judgment?

There are things that the Lord has left to our judgment. This means that we have options as to how certain things may be done. The options must be held within the boundaries set by the word of God, but within those biblical parameters we are at liberty to decide how best to proceed.

For example, the Lord's Supper on the Lord's Day is a New Testament necessity, but the time of day, the place to assemble, the type of containers, etc. are all left to our judgment. Likewise, it is not optional whether believers are to be baptized, but we do have options as to whether we use a baptistry, a lake, or a river. These examples should be obvious and I have not mentioned them because they are generally misunderstood, but to illustrate the principle involved. The same principle applies to many other things and the point being made is that we must be careful to examine whether the issue is really one of scriptural authority or only in the realm of human judgment. We ought to be very careful that we not treat an optional matter as though it were designated by Divine decree.

There is, however, a very important point that needs to be remembered about decisions in the realm of judgment. The fact that the Lord allows us to use our own judgment does not mean that He is pleased with our use of questionable, poor or bad judgment. He expects us to use the best judgment we are capable of determining. Of course no one would admit to deliberately promoting changes that would be bad judgment, and what I might consider a horrendous decision might be thought by others to be very wise. Still, the point is important because those who advocate rapid and radical changes (even in the realm of expedients) would do well to weigh carefully the cautious reservations expressed by others.

Stepping Stones

There are some things which may not in themselves be wrong, but which may be unwise because they can serve as stepping stones to things that are definitely wrong. No, the mere possibility that new approaches might lead to problems does not by itself mean that they have to be rejected. Some would doubtless see dangers in almost any change. We might have such an irrational fear of anything that is different that we would never improve on anything. The fact is that many expediencies which are almost universally accepted among us now are things which were opposed when they were first introduced, partly because of fear that they might serve as stepping stones to apostasy.

All of this does not, however, negate the fact that there ought to be careful and prayerful caution exercised before embracing any significant change. Old ways of doing things are not always the best, but neither should we assume that something new is necessarily better. It is not an absolute rule, but I have often felt there is wisdom in Alexander Pope's advice: "Be not the first by whom the new are tried, Nor yet the last to lay the old aside." Before holding too tenaciously to our old ways of doing things, we should ask whether a scriptural issue is really involved, or whether we just like things the way they are. On the other hand, before accepting changes we should ask: Is it scriptural? Is it safe? And is it really profitable?
 

Back to Articles Menu
Carolina Messenger
Spiritual Sword