While it is very important to be faithful with regard to separation from error, it is all too easy to fall into an unbalanced negative attitude or bigotry which refuses to see any good in evangelicals who are involved in impure denominations. The problem is that they do not share our interpretation. They reject the charge that they are merely “in it to win it.” Many of them agree that the possibility of winning over their denomination as a whole is extremely remote. Their concern is with their calling to pastor distinctly evangelical churches. It is such work which absorbs their time and effort. It is helpful if we can think in realistic rather than theoretical terms by remembering that denominational affiliation is only one part of this complex subject. A host of errors exist and each calls for a Biblical response. Added to the difficulty is the fact that often smaller matte~s such as how we order our worship services are inflated into matters of huge concern because some church members threaten to resign unless they have their way. When individuals get worked up to a high pressure then this inevitably creates new dangers of division. Stuart Olyott testifies that he has seen Christian leaders boil over their differences on discipline of the Lord’s Table but doubts whether they would ever work up such indignation about those who deny the Deity of Christ! We know this to be true in many cases. The whole idea is not to discount the importance of the Biblical teaching on separation but to give much more prominence to the need to speak the truth in love and also to maintain the fullest quota of unity possible within the framework of so many different evangelical groupings that exist.

The case of Paul reproving Peter (Gal. 2) is cited by some as if that confrontational approach should be the standard approach to all manifestations of error. There is a difference between a toe over the line and a whole body over the line. We must remember that the Jewish Gentile issue was the white hot subject of the apostolic era. Peter was a leading apostle of the Jewish party. The struggle was for unity (Eph. chs. 2–4). All truth is to be earnestly contended for, but woe betide us if we lose our sense of priority and proportion and fail to act pastorally, discerningly and affectionately with all God’s people. We should observe how Paul deals with the chaos that existed at Corinth. He calls the offenders “brothers” (1 Cor. 1:26, 2:1, 3:1, 10:1, 12:1, 15:1), and praises them for the little bit that they did get right (11 :2). He does not compromise in any way in setting the truth before them, but he does not issue a threat on each issue as he travels through, that if they do not immediately conform he will have nothing more to do with them.

Reprinted from Reformation Today, November-December 1983, editorial pp. 1, 2. Published at P. 0. Box 106, Heywards Heath, Sussex, England RH16 1QJL.