A recent letter by Bill Gothard indicated that varying standards are the cause for much of the disunity in churches today. This letter, which was included with a recent mailing from Gothard’s Institute in Basic Life Principles, addressed the topic of a lack of unity in conservative churches due to some members having one particular standard and others having another standard, so that they are not unified and risk offending each other rather than being united in worship. The solution that Gothard seemed to be suggesting was that individuals should conform to the standards of the “weakest member” in order to be united and not cause others to sin or be divided.

The basic premise may be fairly accurate, but the application is not. Yes, there is much disunity because people are not willing to budge on their own lifestyle preferences, not considering that others who don’t share the same view might at least be somewhat right. We tend to hold the view that we alone are right so that others can only be right if they are identical. So we’re each certain of our righteousness and thus the error of another. And as a result, unity is lost. There is also a lack of unity when we fail to realize that some people are weaker in faith or more prone to sinning in a certain area, and it is insensitive to ignore this and flaunt freedom in the face of one who has not been given that freedom. Gothard is right on this.

But there’s an element that’s overlooked. When people differ over a “standard”, who is right and who is wrong? There are issues of morality where there is clear direction in Scripture. There are issues of conscience where something must be avoided in the presence of another so as to not cause temptation. But there are also issues where neither applies, and it is simply a war of preferences. The answer that I detected that Gothard was suggesting was that people conform to the “highest” standard as that is the safest way to achieve unity. But if both are right, then wouldn’t it be wrong for one to conform to the other?

What about the possibility of one person being offended by another’s different standard? If a person is offended, shouldn’t the person causing the offense stop what they are doing for the sake of unity? In theory, yes.

There are cases where it is an issue of tempting another to sin. As a church is a hospital for sinners, it would not be wise (for example) for a woman to enter in a string bikini as this is the kind of exposure that many men are not immune to. This woman would not be considerate of her fellow brothers if she came to church in this fashion. But the man can’t be forced by the woman into sin. (Adam tried that excuse…) It’s still an act of his will, and thus a fault on his part. There is a responsibility for both individuals. It can’t be made to be all one and none the other. As a result, it is also not right to adopt a “burqa, bag, or floor-length skirt” dress code. This places the main load of the responsibility on the woman and seems to absolve the man from responsibility… while in reality if he is struggling with sin, it just leaves more to his fallen imagination.

But in the standards debate, most of the time it is not a moral/sin issue but rather a preference that is being violated. If someone is always being held to an expectation of conforming to another’s preferences, then the one with the high preferences is enslaving those around them to coerce others to be as they are. This is just as wrong; the blame for the disunity cannot be applied more to the person who violates the preference than it can be applied to the person who expects others to adhere to their own preferences. This is the issue where I will strongly agree with the suggested solution in Gothard’s letter. The solution is not to have everyone conform to the same preferences but rather for each person to realize that they are not alike and then have a greater appreciation for their diversity. If this is realized and put into practice, then it is that diversity that spawns unity in the Body of Christ. Not all are hands, feet, etc. Each member is unique. It is a dangerous and wrong idea to think that all Christians will be identical if they are at the same place in their walks with Christ, or to think that the closer each person is to God, the more alike each person will be.

C.S. Lewis wrote, “…life is not like a river but like a tree. It does not move towards unity but rather away from it and the creatures grow further apart as they increase in perfection. Good, as it ripens, becomes continually more different not only from evil but from other good.”

This is a topic that I may return to in some future posts. For now, I will close with the reminder that there is no such thing as a “cookie cutter Christian” and that as people draw closer to God, they may actually become more and more different from each other.