Paul certainly felt that the feelings of others were to be respected; he would go so far as to give up his right to eat meat-if it made his brother stumble (1 Cor. 8). This article is not intended in any way to detract from the point that Paul is making here; certainly we must be considerate of how others think (even if they are wrong).
But let us also take note that Paul was discussing giving up one’s personal liberties for the benefit of one’s brethren. He was not advocating that the church should give up various ideas, practices, or programs because some members didn’t like them. If that were the case, there would not be very many churches anywhere doing anything.
No matter what program is begun, it will invariably generate an adverse response from someone. In one congregation a new personal work program was just under way when brother Ken Tankerous confronted the leader: “I don’t like the way you do personal evangelism.” “Neither do I,” the man replied. “How do you do it?” “Well,” he stammered, “I don’t.” The conclusion was, “I guess I like the way I do it unsatisfactorily better than the way you don’t do it at all.”
Of course, most brethren have preferences as to how something should be done, but they recognize that there are different ideas and different means of getting something accomplished. Most programs are merely expedient ways of fulfilling a command, and brethren understand that we must maintain a certain amount of flexibility.
Problems are generated when some erroneously conclude that just because they object to something, it must be wrong. For example, one congregation decided to have a ladies’ class on Wednesday evening. This was not a new or novel idea since many churches do the same thing and have for years. In fact, the congregation in question had conducted one the year previously.
Since the sisters vastly outnumbered the brothers, they were given the auditorium while the men met in a classroom. This arrangement was objected to on the basis that visitors would come in and think women were exercising authority over men. So the men met in the foyer to apprise any latecomers of the situation (it never happened). But soon that became inappropriate, too. The same objector now had decided that it was unscriptural for the women to have a class at all during what he misnamed “the assembly.” On the basis of this one objection (with a faulty premise), the men cancelled the class.
In this way the women were cheated out of a class that dealt with subjects that pertained specifically to them. Minority rule (especially a minority of one) cannot be allowed in the Lord’s church.
One person objects to having Bible classes of any kind; another objects to having more than one communion cup (is it possible that all 3,000 converts drank out of one cup in Jerusalem?); still another thinks no one should eat in the church building (or have weddings or funerals there). How sad that on several continents the souls of millions will enter into eternity unprepared while we sit in relative ease, debating the real issues, such as whether or not it is Scriptural to use educational literature in Bible classes.
Our purpose is not to make light of a genuine attempt to understand the Scriptures; we all need to be serious Bible students. But we ought to be big enough to admit that some matters belong in the realm of preferences and opinions and do not fall under the scepter of “thus saith the Lord.”
God expects us to agree in points of doctrine (1 Cor. 1:10); He also expects us to be kind and gracious in areas of opinion (1 Cor. 13:4-7). There is no room in the kingdom of God for the minority rule of the one who insists, “It’s my way, or there will be trouble.” Too many people thinking only of themselves have lived by the “I’ll take my marbles and go home” philosophy. [In some cases they have withheld their contributions in an effort to apply pressure to the elders to show that they mean business.]
Those engaged in such tactics could not possibly have the humble mind of Christ within them (Phil. 2:5-8) or care about His body, the church (Eph. 5:28-29). The spirit of Diotrephes remains among us (3 John 9-10), but those of this stripe cannot be allowed to control the direction of the congregation because they will eventually rob it of every ounce of potential for good that it has.
The church needs men who have enough vision to try programs focused on evangelism and edification that fall within Scriptural parameters. The church must learn to disregard the naysaying minority, whose stock lines consist of: 1) “We’ve never tried that before”; and 2)”We tried that before, and it didn’t work.”
Jesus gave us urgent work to do; time does not afford us the luxury of mollifying everyone who has a different idea, or worse-no idea at all. Let us all have the courage to apply Biblical truths with the wisdom and foresight God gave us.