The Christadelphian May 1923, C. C. Walker

“Brotherhood and Fellowship”

A brother writes:—“What does fellowship mean from a scriptural point of view? In refusing fellowship is it not tantamount to refusing to be partakers of their wrongdoing, thinking, or belief, and therefore cutting them off from the Kingdom of God? A brother remarked a short time ago, ‘I shall feel somewhat ashamed of myself if at the judgment seat I see a brother to whom I have refused fellowship going in to the Kingdom before me.’ I agreed with him.”

Fellowship should be the loving companionship of those who believe the same divinely-revealed things in all essential particulars, and follow them in the conduct of their lives. Paul calls this the “fellowship of the gospel,” “the fellowship of Jesus Christ our Lord,” the “fellowship of Christ’s sufferings.” While John says, “Ye may have fellowship with us,” and that we may know what is the nature of that fellowship he adds, “our fellowship is with the Father and his son Jesus Christ.” We may deceive ourselves concerning this as the apostle says (1 John 1:6–7), “If we say we have fellowship and walk in darkness we lie and do not the truth.” “If we walk in the light we have fellowship one with another.”

Paul (2 Cor. 6:14) says that righteousness can have no fellowship with unrighteousness, any more than light and darkness can mingle, or Christ join with Belial, or a believer with an infidel, or the temple of God with idols.

It follows that the refusal of fellowship means on the part of the one making the refusal, that there is something in the one refused that is incompatible with light and truth. But it by no means follows that this is so in the sight of God.

Can two brethren not in fellowship with each other be in fellowship with Christ? Certainly in such a case there is something wrong, but whether it be serious enough to break fellowship with Christ is a question that could not be answered in a general way. We can conceive of a defect of mind or a paucity of imagination that would earnestly lead a good man to see evil where there was none. One man might withdraw from another because they could not agree as to the elements composing the moon, or the distance and size of the planet Jupiter. If it were purely such a question that kept one man from fellowship with another, and both men were otherwise exemplary, the question of fellowship is complicated. But probably both Christ and the one withdrawn from would still feel a loving fellowship with the misguided righteous man, while deploring his short-sightedness and the state of mind that could see in such a matter anything that affected fellowship at all.

One can see in such a case that the brother with the moon theory of fellowship might well be ashamed at the judgment seat, as our brother correspondent says. But who would say that he would therefore be utterly condemned? The defect of mind swept away, might he not be as Paul was both after his enlightenment and before it, a zealous servant of God?

It was remarked to a zealous brother, concerning an astronomic theory that he thought we were unfaithful to God’s Word in not sharing, that it was certain that Christ at the judgment would not ask him what the shape of the earth was, but that he might ask questions concerning the rude and intolerant way in which the brother spoke to his brethren about it. This applies also to matters of purity of doctrine. A brother may be so determined to show that another is at fault in a small matter that he will himself break several really important commandments in his endeavour to pull the mote out of his brother’s eye. He sees his brother’s fly and does not notice his own camel. To remove a mote from the eye is a delicate operation, as we all know, calling for delicate touch, clear perception, and a steady kindly hand. Better let the mote remain rather than destroy a man’s sight. The chronic fault-finder found short shrift at Christ’s hands when he was here. Will he have changed when he comes again? We think not.

Our brother correspondent speaks of “refusing fellowship being tantamount to cutting others off from the Kingdom of God.” No man can do that. It is Christ’s prerogative, thank God. We may rightly refuse fellowship to persistent wrongdoing, vitally wrong thinking, and heretical belief, after we have done our best to make the wrongs right. But if the wrongdoers are cut off from the Kingdom it will not be because of anyone’s withdrawal from them, but because of their own shortcomings.