Christian Character Isn’t The Only Test of Fellowship
If you’ve been in Advent Christian circles long enough, then you’ve heard the line that “Christian character is the only test of fellowship.” This creed communicates a lot about who we are, yet the term “Christian character” is ambiguous and unhelpful. When I’ve asked for a clear definition of Christian character very few are up to the challenge of clearing up the muddy waters. I will attempt to define Christian character and why it is insufficient as the only test of Christian fellowship.
What is Christian character?
To define Christian character or biblical morality one must acknowledge that (1) there is absolute truth and (2) there is absolute right and wrong. This begs the question, “From where do we receive truth and our concept of right and wrong?” We need look no further than the nature of God who in Himself is good, just, and moral. When Isaiah witnesses the Angels saying, “Holy, holy, holy is the LORD Almighty; the whole earth is full of his glory,” we see God’s set-apartness from creation, that He alone is righteous in His very nature. He doesn’t learn righteousness or earn it. In fact, righteousness proceeds from His very nature. Morality first and foremost finds its source in the nature of God. So to build a biblical morality or Christian ethic one must first do the work of a theologian. Therefore, character as the only test of fellowship is an empty statement when one also claims “no creed but Bible,” because you lose a clear theological basis to make a moral or ethical statement. When you define Christian morality and character you have made for yourself and others a creed, which is simply a clear statement of what one believes.
So biblical morality is built on a proper biblical and theological understanding of God. This is one reason why a proper understanding of God’s nature and His attributes is crucial for a Christian. It is very much a theological matter.
When we suggest Christian character as the only test of fellowship I think we can make our shibboleth something that no one can live up to, but Christ. Therefore, we most often look to whether one is generally characterized by righteousness or unrighteousness. That means that although one might sin, they aren’t caught up in habitual unrepentant sin.
One thing that is often overlooked in this discussion is Christian fruit. There is much to be said about fruit, which can easily be defined as the result of our new life in Christ. It is something both objective and subjective. Is one bearing fruit in keeping with repentance? Zaccheaus seems to fit this bill when he turns away from his sin and restores what he had stolen. The man in the Corinthian Church provides doubt. Why might that be? Though Christians can grow at different rates, one thing is common to us all, a shared hatred for our own sin. When our hearts have been changed, we’ve been clothed with the righteousness of Christ, and the Holy Spirit dwells within us, sin has no welcome place in our hearts. Sin, which is a reproach on the moral nature of God, is laid out in His Word. It’s why the Law is a blessing inasmuch that it drives us to the cross of Christ. So when one sins it is brought to their consciousness through the Word, either read or shared, and the work of the Holy Spirit who pricks the heart of the Christian when they encroach upon what God calls good.
So at this point we have been regenerated; that is, given a new heart. We have received Christ’s righteousness, that is something foreign to us. Lastly, our unrighteousness has been taken upon another and dealt with outside of ourselves. The heart of the question at hand is now “How are we to live and should this be the only test of fellowship?”
Character does matter
Please don’t misunderstand me when I suggest that character is a poor test of fellowship. It isn’t. Morality is quite important in the Bible so let’s take a look at a couple of case studies.
The Apostle Paul writes to the Corinthian Church that they have sinned by not disciplining a church member who had sex with his step-mother, “It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father's wife.” (1 Cor. 5:1) Paul’s admonition is actually against the church before he even addresses this man’s sin. So in this case study we see that character doesn’t only matter individually, but also collectively.
Consider how Paul points out the sin of Peter in Galatians 2:11-13, “11But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. 13And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy.” Peter began to treat Gentiles differently out of fear of the Jewish Christians even though the Jerusalem Council had decided that the Gentiles were part of the church and did not need to observe Jewish law. The problem was theological and then moral.
So are we right in using Christian character as a test of fellowship? That certainly seems appropriate when married with God’s grace. Why? We all fall short of God’s glory. No one is without sin. True Christian character isn’t found in earned righteousness, but our alien righteousness that comes from being united to Christ.
Is Character alone a good test of fellowship?
Two of the nicest and most charitable people that I’ve met are atheistic and agnostic. From what I have observed they are honest, faithful to their spouses, kind to others, generous, and haven’t committed any crimes that I’m aware of. For all intents and purposes, they have what has been popularized as Christian character. Should they be members of my church even though they reject Christ? No. Another friend of mine who is Muslim fits the same category. Should we invite him to be a member of our church? No. But in all three cases these dear friends meet the oft cited Advent Christian criteria of “Christian character is the only test of fellowship.”
Shared faith matters just as much as character
One of the earliest creeds of the Christian faith is found in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7, “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 5and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.”
Paul writes to correct those who denied the resurrection of Christ and the dead. John writes his three letters to encourage the church and correct errors of false teachers who denied the necessity of Christ and His human nature. We see in Titus that Paul writes to him as his, “true child in a common faith” and in Jude 1:3 we see the author say he was, “very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.”
What is the common faith? What is the common salvation? Why must we contend for the faith? What is the faith that we are to contend for? As soon as you answer any of these questions you have begun constructing a creed, which many believe is anti-Advent Christian. It certainly doesn’t jive with “no creed but the Bible.” Why? A creed or confession is the articulation of what one believes the Bible says. When Paul and Jude appeal to a common faith and salvation as the basis for their unity with their audience, they have implicitly instituted a test of fellowship based on a set of shared beliefs beyond character.
What happens when we don’t have both?
Knowledge without humility puffs up with conceit. Humility without knowledge is empty, because there is no foundation for it. We need both character and shared faith in order to remain in fellowship because it is what we see in the New Testament as well as the Old. You can’t have one without the other. Indeed, one proceeds from the other as demonstrated above. We only construct a biblical morality and Christian ethic when we have first developed our understanding of who God is. To have character and no faith is a charade that leads to death and destruction.
When we only use character as a test of fellowship we are encouraging moralism; as long as one obeys the law then they are part of the church. Instead, we see in Scripture that we are only able to obey the law rightly, when we have been redeemed by Christ. Otherwise our morality is empty and means nothing. In fact all of our work means nothing when divorced from serving our God.
If we built a robust creed and confession replete with a sound interpretation of Scripture, but lack character, then we have left our faith in the hands of intellectualism, which becomes an idol. Theology that doesn’t lead to application is theology that isn’t believed. It is empty. Character without a biblical and theological framework is not different from Secular Humanism, which uses subjective criteria that changes with the culture.
Conclusion
My hope is that we as a church and association can come to the historic understanding that biblical theology informs our development of biblical morality and Christian ethics. We should embrace this approach and reject the idea that Christian character is the only test of fellowship due to its shallowness and vagueness. At the very core of New Testament communities is a shared faith and a spurring on of one another in fruit and good works. This absolutely includes character shaped by our new life in Christ. But it is not limited to that.
You can check out recent article focused on Denominational Unity here: