You Keep Using That Word...

To paraphrase a great philosopher of popular fiction, I do not think “unity” means what you think it means. Unity is an interesting concept, and often its meaning depends almost entirely on the context. To my brothers and sisters still attending Grace Community Church who may read this post, I would ask you to think for just a moment about how many times you may have heard that word from elders and church leaders over the course of the past several months. How many times have you been exhorted to “maintain the unity of the church” in those or similar words? Given how much we have been hearing about “unity” lately, I decided to take a quick look at the Scriptures to see what word the Lord has for us regarding this important principle. What I found was somewhat surprising, even to me. The word “unity” appears only four times in the New Testament (NASB95, used for GCC Bible Quizzing). Two of those occurrences are together in the same passage of Ephesians. To give some context for this number by way of comparison, the word “compassion” appears seventeen times in the New Testament, and the word “faith” appears in a full 228 verses, sometimes more than once within the verse.

How is the word “unity” used in the New Testament? The first occurrence comes in the Gospel of John, where Jesus’ prayer to the Father before the crucifixion is recorded. John 17:22-24:

“The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me. Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.”

Now, I have a confession to make. I have never been to seminary. However, it does seem to me that the clear reading of this passage would suggest that the “unity” to which Christ refers is not some kind of circling of the wagons around a specific community of His followers, but rather a spiritual unity between God’s children and their Savior. Perhaps the other two passages will offer more clarity on the issue. In Colossians 3:12-15, the concept of unity comes into play once again.

“So, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience; bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord forgave you, so also should you. Beyond all these things put on love, which is the perfect bond of unity. Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in one body; and be thankful.”

My brothers and sisters, this is indeed a call for us to acknowledge our unity in Christ. The fact is that all of us who have been saved by His grace and covered by His blood are one in His church. We are called to be one body. Rejecting, belittling, and shunning one another is not Christian unity. Nor is casting suspicion on any part of Christ’s church that does not hold fellowship in the same location or in the same way as we do. Our bond of unity is love, and it is forged in our relationship with God, not in our formal membership with a specific, local congregation, but I digress. One other passage speaks of unity in the New Testament, and that passage occurs in Ephesians. In chapter 4, there is a passage with which I am sure those who attend GCC are rather familiar.

“…walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, showing tolerance for one another in love, being diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.” (emphasis mine)

Are those of us who have gone out from GCC of a different body? Are we regenerated by a different Spirit, do we serve a different Lord, or are we of a different faith? Is our baptism invalidated by our rejection of an earthly teacher, or is it our heavenly Teacher who is the source of the unity of our faith? Later in the chapter, Paul continues, saying,

“…for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.”

This seems to suggest that this unity is not solely a matter of believers being one with one another. Rather, in this passage (particularly in light of Jesus’ prayer recorded in John), it seems that we are also to be unified with the character of Christ, trying to reach toward maturity by growing ever closer to Him. These are the only passages in the New Testament that talk about unity. How does the concept represented in these passages compare to the discussions of “unity” in the body that have been taking place in the congregation at Grace Community? I would go so far as to ask; how many times have the leaders acknowledged in their recent exhortations to “unity” that we should be one with our brothers and sisters who worship with other local congregations, or that we should seek unity with the church as it exists across the world?

Unity Defined

How should we define “unity”? Just as the English word we use in translation comes from the Latin for “one,” the Koine Greek word is also directly etymologically related to the word for “one.” The motto of the United States, “e pluribus unum,” inscribed on so many coins that have served as makeshift fidget toys or as questionable décor for my car’s cupholders, has long reminded me of how we are called as followers of Christ. “From every tribe and tongue and people and nation” God has called His people. By His grace, we have all been made heirs to His eternal kingdom. In light of such undeserved goodness and bountiful mercy, how is it that we still squabble amongst ourselves, being caught up in petty quarrels? It may come as a surprise to some, but even with hearts transformed by the Spirit, we do not all think in the same way. No command in Scripture requires us to wear away the uniqueness that God has crafted in every single one of us. Indeed, we would not be commanded to “[show] tolerance for one another in love” if there were no differences that need to be tolerated. Unity is the ability to love one another and worship alongside one another despite our differences.

Unfortunately, the idea of “unity” is sometimes confused with “uniformity.” Whether this confusion is intentional or an honest mistake depends on the circumstances, but both can be deeply damaging to a people. In the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, several definitions are given for the word “unity.” The first two definitions are “the quality or state of not being multiple: oneness” and “a condition of harmony,” respectively. Oneness does not mean sameness, and the Scripture says as much in 1 Corinthians 12:15-21.

“For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot says, ‘Because I am not a hand, I am not a part of the body,’ it is not for this reason any the less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole were hearing, where would the sense of smell be? But now God has placed the members, each one of them, in the body, just as He desired. If they were all one member, where would the body be? But now there are many members, but one body.”

Just as a harmonious piece of music does not consist of all one note, and the body does not consist of all arms, or legs, or hands, in the same way the church also consists of many people with many differing opinions, unified in the Spirit through the salvation that comes in Christ alone. “Uniformity” is a different concept, and one that should not be confused with proper Christian unity. Since the Merriam-Webster definition is rather self-referential in this case (“the quality or state of being uniform”), I will instead offer the version from Cambridge. The Cambridge dictionary defines uniformity as “the quality or fact of being the same, or of not changing or being different in any way.” This is a concept more closely related to the idea of “conformity” than with “unity” as laid out in Scripture. While we are not to be “conformed to this world,” we are also never called to conform to any other human standard. We are called to be “conformed to the image of [Christ],” and this is not commanded in any way that would conflict with the previously cited passages on unity in all our God-given differences. God never demands a standard of uniformity for His church in Scripture, and indeed the passage above describes at length how we are to encourage the exact opposite approach to Christian unity. Yet, how often do we fall short of this call to develop community with a full range of God-given differences among us? How often do we silence those of whom we disapprove, and refuse to hear the pleas of individuals who do not conform to a uniform narrative of how to live out our calling as a church? Differences should not be quelled in the name of holding to this standard of “unity.” I would argue that Scripture exhorts us to reject this approach and to show the same Christian love, in community and fellowship, to those with whom we may not fully agree.

Unity Abused

Despite the fact that “unity” is not a particularly prominent concept in Scripture, the concept has played a significant role in church history. One of the major arguments the Catholics present when claiming that the Reformation was a tragic evil in the history of the faith is that these reformers were responsible for disrupting the unity of the church. To this day, the Roman Catholics have not retracted the supposedly infallible declaration made in 1302 by Pope Boniface VIII, that “now, therefore, we declare, say, define, and pronounce that for every human creature it is altogether necessary for salvation to be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff.” This is the ultimate requirement of unity, boldly claiming that any individual operating in disunity from the authority of the Pope can be denied all assurance of their salvation. We do not believe our salvation is subject to any human authority, Catholic or Protestant, Roman or American.

The Roman Catholics are not the only institution that has pushed the principle of unity as a guise for control. There was a rather famous historical case in which the pastor of a small congregation in Indiana, later moved to California, was preaching a vision of communal harmony and racial equality. To maintain “unity” in these ideals, the man required absolute loyalty to his socialist ideology. He enforced conformity through intense group activities, confessions, and punishments for dissent, creating an environment where deviation was seen as betrayal. Ultimately, over 900 people who followed this man met their deaths in Jonestown, Guyana. While this is one of the more dramatic cases, it is far from the only situation where organizations focused on “unity” over all else have gone astray. Bill Gothard’s group, Institute in Basic Life Principles (IBLP), is one such example. IBLP began as a nondenominational organization promoting adherence to biblical principles, homeschooling, and family-oriented teachings (which I doubt many of us would find to be objectionable in themselves). The organization developed a culture that penalized nonconformity, and eventually came to demand complete loyalty. The group encouraged isolation from outsiders, and the pressure to conform to expectations forged a “unified” group dynamic of fear that discouraged any dissent, reinforcing uniformity within the organization. Gothard positioned himself as a near-infallible figure of authority within IBLP. Multiple allegations of sexual harassment and molestation (involving 34 women, some minors) eventually came to light, in the process revealing how the authority structures within Gothard’s group consistently suppressed dissent. Victims were discouraged from speaking out in order to preserve the organization’s image and Gothard’s authority.

Like Gothard’s group, the Jehovah’s Witness cult discourages its followers from associating with non-members (“worldly” people) and from accessing external information that may be critical of the group, in order to reinforce the group’s uniformity of thought through isolation. This group also regularly practices shunning (“disfellowshipping”), ostracizing members who deviate from expectations. This threat of isolation, even from friends and family, creates intense social pressure to conform. The organization also uses financial and time commitments as mechanisms to ensure loyalty. Jehovah’s Witnesses claim these measures exist to maintain spiritual purity and are voluntary, but these practices are emotionally manipulative. Similarly, some independent evangelical or fundamentalist churches exhibit high-control traits, particularly with a charismatic leader at the helm. Examples of this pattern include both megachurches and smaller congregations, particularly those without any specific denominational affiliation. These groups often enforce uniformity through fear of spiritual consequences, strict behavioral rules (such as those regarding dress, relationships, or media consumption), and social pressure to conform. The leaders hold inappropriate levels of control, with emphasis on financial giving and time-intensive involvement further binding members to the group. By discouraging dissent and limiting access to outside perspectives, they prevent members from recognizing the degree of inappropriate control.

Mars Hill Church was another interesting case. Over 18 years the church grew to around 14,000 members across multiple locations. The co-founder, Mark Driscoll, was a provocative and dynamic personality, known for a distinctly hyper-masculine theology. In 2014, he was forced to resign amid allegations of abusive leadership and financial misconduct. As a pastor, Driscoll was domineering, quick-tempered, and verbally abusive. Many reports indicate he created a climate of fear, claiming that dissent threatened “church unity.” Former elders reported that he slandered or mocked departing members, and labeled them as “demonic” to maintain group loyalty. When people left with complaints about the circumstances, they were ostracized. Driscoll publicly and repeatedly attacked critics, framing them as threats to the church’s mission. This reinforced conformity by vilifying outsiders. "There is a pile of dead bodies behind the Mars Hill bus, and by God's grace, it'll be a mountain by the time we're done.” Mark Driscoll once said. “You either get on the bus or you get run over by the bus." Mars Hill rapidly collapsed following Driscoll’s resignation, clearly demonstrating the dangers of having a single, central individual as the linchpin for an organization. His demand for “unity” as conformity to his leadership stifled accountability and harmed members.

Unity in Christ

True unity must not come at the cost of proper Christian freedoms, and it especially must not come at the cost of accountability for sin, as seen in these cases of abuse and cover-ups.  While enforced uniformity can foster a sense of community, the use of coercive tactics such as fear, shunning, and manipulation creates an environment in which dissent is equated with betrayal. So, taken altogether, how should we as followers of Christ approach the concept of unity? Well, first, we should acknowledge that, of all the virtues highlighted in Scripture for us to emulate, “unity” does not seem to be God’s highest priority for us. The places where this concept is mentioned do not seem to place “unity” as the primary focus, but rather love and the Spirit. Any attempt to promote unity as a virtue either above, or completely divorced from, these vital elements seems to almost intentionally miss the point. Secondly, as fellow servants of the Living God, we must be diligent to accurately handle His Words, paying careful attention to ensure we know what is meant by each one in context, and not tossing them about lightly simply to serve our own ends. For this, we must look not at how we would define “unity,” but rather how God describes “unity.” Finally, we must recognize that we live in a world full of wolves. No human being, however knowledgeable, is an authority in whom we should place our complete trust for matters of salvation. Our unity is in Christ, and we have seen far too many examples of shepherds who would divide the flock against each other for their own gain. To conclude, I would leave you with this quote from a Lutheran theologian of the early 17th century. “In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity.” Let us all seek unity in love, and in the Spirit, as the Good Lord intended. Amen.