Collyer on One body
Of all Scriptural principles, this may seem the simplest.
Almost any brother or sister could expound it, could exhibit the beauty of the
apostle's simile and reveal the folly of any member being either puffed up with
an impression of superior office or depressed by lack of qualification for any
particular form of service. Eye and ear and foot and hand all have worthy parts
to play. A well equipped mouth is of no service if it fails to arrive at the
place where it is wanted. The feet have to bring it. It may follow therefore
that an inferior mouth would render better service if only it could be supported
by better feet.
The principle is recognized at least in theory, and it needs
no further theoretical exposition. Is it recognized in practice? Do we realize
the object "that there should be no schism in the body"? Have members "the same
care one for another"? So that if "one member suffer, all the members suffer
with it"?
The apostle truly presents a high ideal, but it is the ideal
at which we must aim if we want to be saved. All that we are told of the
judgment seat tends to show that the supreme test is in these matters. If we are
repudiated then, it will be because we have failed to live the Truth and not for
inability to understand it. We are told that some will be punished for errors
committed without adequate knowledge of their Lord's will; but assuredly it will
not be because of inability to understand. It is our duty to know our Lord's
will. The necessary instruction is given to us, and if we fail to hear and
understand it is almost certain that an obstinate self-deception is at the root
of the difficulty. Such obdurate self-deception is deserving of
stripes.
A simple test will probably prove to all who are able to
receive instruction that they have far to go in pursuit of the apostolic ideal.
Have we the same care one for another? If one member suffers do we all suffer in
sympathy, or if one member is honoured do we all rejoice? The natural tendency
of the flesh is in the wrong direction under each of these headings. It is
natural to have care for those who are the objects of our especial regard, and
to be indifferent to all others. Of course, there will be special friendships in
the Brotherhood, with different degrees and even different kinds of love. This
is inevitable, and not at all incompatible with true fellowship. It is well to
understand the distinction between the two words. Friendship is individual and
peculiar. You cannot have ten thousand close friends. Fellowship is collective
and comprehensive. You can be in true fellowship with any number. Friendship is
at liberty to make selection of special companions. Just as a man in the Faith
is at liberty to marry whom he will "only in the Lord", so is he at liberty to
choose his special friends, assuming, of course, in both cases, that the desires
are reciprocal and that the choice made is in harmony with the other commands of
the Lord. Fellowship does not give us such liberty. We fellowship each other on
the basis of the one Faith, and this may draw together men and women who are
utterly different in taste and temperament. These differences will inevitably
affect our choice of special friends but they ought not to affect our "care for
one another" in the fellowship of the Gospel. The point can be illustrated
without departure from the most ordinary experiences of life. If a brother or
sister who is a very dear friend shows signs of weakness and a need for special
help, we are ready to give any amount of care and attention to nurse the feeble
one back to healthy faith. We would reprove any impatient critic, and find
plenty of scripture to assist our advocacy of gentle methods. What
long-suffering, patience, gentleness, and compassion are shown in our great
example! How many injunctions there are to be kind, considerate, and forbearing!
But are we quite as ready to think of these passages if the straying sheep is
one whose personality repels us? Are we as ready to sacrifice rest and comfort
in trying to assist the unattractive wanderer?
The question whether brethren attract us or repel us
personally does not in the least degree affect the truth of their being members
of the One Body, and we ought to have the "same care one for another", because
of our fellowship in the Truth, unaffected by the affinities and preferences
which belong to human personality. This, of course, as with many others duties,
is unnatural. The natural tendency is to be "partial" in judgment. We may be
quite innocent of showing any undue respect to the man with a gold ring or
disrespect toward the one who is poorly clad, yet we may fall into an exactly
similar error on a different basis. A dear friend has erred. Well, we remember
how forbearing our Lord was with sinners. We must restore him in the spirit of
meekness. One who always repelled us has erred. We remember how Samuel treated
Agag; we remember the apostle's instructions to withdraw from those who are
disorderly. We must be valiant for the Truth.
It is not suggested that all are under the sway of such
fleshly instincts leading to such partiality of judgment. This, however is the
natural tendency, and it is questionable whether even those who are most
conscious of the weakness have overcome it entirely. Has there never been a time
when in dealing with a friend, you have shown a consideration and patience far
beyond anything you can muster for that other offender who does not interest you
or possibly repels you? If there has been any such partiality, has it been an
instance of weakness in dealing with a friend when you should have been valiant
for the truth; or has it been harshness in dealing with another when you should
have remembered the meekness and gentleness of Christ? True fellowship demands
that we should have the same care one for another "that there be no schism in
the body". When we are least inclined to remember the rights and the
interdependence of members, then we should try our hardest. When we are least
attracted to members we have the best opportunity for increasing the duties of
fellowship. Where our sympathies are least engaged we have the best opportunity
of showing that we can be impartial, having the same care one for
another.
It is easier for us to conform to the Apostolic command under
the second heading we have mentioned. We can suffer with those who suffer, more
readily than we can rejoice with those who are honoured. The suffering, however,
has to be near and obvious, or we can easily forget and ignore it. We have heard
of the millionaire who was so touched with the pitiful story of a caller that he
said to a servant, "Send this poor fellow away at once, or I shall have no
appetite for dinner." Perhaps there are many even in the Brotherhood who would
find it too painful to regard the lives of their fellows very closely. A tragedy
in the house of a next-door neighbour will cast a gloom over us when a far
greater tragedy in a distant land hardly affects us at all. In the same way we
shall be partial in our treatment of brethren near and distant unless we make a
great effort to enlarge our sympathies.
When we are called upon to rejoice with the member who is
highly honoured, the task is still more difficult, especially for some natures.
There are men who could sympathize with a friend's misfortune and even make a
generous effort to assist him; but they can never forgive him for being
successful. The jealous feeling is well disguised, of course. They fear that the
friend's good fortune will turn his head and spoil his character, and we may
rest assured that they will find ample confirmation of their worst fears, act
how he may. Such people are capable of killing an old friend with pinpricks;
shaking their heads all the while, and deploring his supposed
weakness.
It is only too true that even brethren are often very unkind
to each other without ever owning the fault or recognizing the tortuous
self-deception which leads to the cruelty. The evils in the world are reproduced
among those who are supposed to have come out from the world. It is easy to
forget that there are any obligations in connection with the One Body or that if
we sin against any of the members we sin against the Head. The One Body is
formed on the basis of the One Faith; the essentials of which remain as in the
days of the apostles. They do not change from year to year with the exigencies
of human policy. Faith has been corrupted repeatedly both by the neglect of
essentials and by the additions of human ideas. We must hold fast to the Word
which is the only true light. It does not matter what men may think or say of
us; what would the Lord have us do? That is the supreme test and it is well for
us to use it now in the day of opportunity and before the day of judgment. If we
can really bend our spirits to "learn of him", we find at once that our duties
are constructive and that they begin with the nurture and care of the One Body
which is being developed on the basis of the One Faith.
(PrPr)
