Secondary and Tertiary Issues Are Still Important

There’s a fine line we walk in this Christian life between issues of primary importance (such as the gospel, doctrine of God, and doctrines of Scripture) and secondary and tertiary issues (such as church order, worship styles, and end times theology). It’s easy to talk about this fine line, but it’s another thing to have to walk on it. 

When God led me to my theological stance, he also placed me in a small community where no church holds to this theology—not even closely. My family and I are members at a church that is on the opposite side of the theological spectrum for us. We’ve had to keep “the main thing the main thing” and remember that despite our differences, we each believe the same gospel and worship the same God. We each care deeply about the gospel reaching everyone in our community. Together, we long to serve the local body with our gifts, even if we disagree about what that looks like at times. We and our leaders believe in the importance of Sunday morning worship, even though we greatly differ on what that should look and sound like. 

As I work together in unity with my brothers and sisters in Christ despite our differences, it doesn’t mean that the differences don’t matter. While I should never use my different interpretations to shame my church and their leaders, I can still stand strongly on them. I can still disagree. I’ve been accused (outside my local church) at times for not keeping “the main thing the main thing” or “majoring on the minors” when I discuss my stances. I’ve been told I should forfeit what I believe—and churches who do hold to what I believe should as well, and that we’ve all forgotten that our purpose is to bring Christ to the lost, no matter how that looks. 

I can both keep the gospel as the most important part of my life and still hold my secondary and tertiary beliefs passionately. While they aren’t the main thing, they are still important. God struck people dead for worshiping him the wrong way in both the Old and New Testament—I think God feels passionately about it too. In discussing Zwingli and Luther’s differences over the Lord’s Supper, J. Gresham Machen wrote in Christianity and Liberalism, 

“Luther was wrong about the Supper, but not nearly so wrong as he would have been if, being wrong, he had said to his opponents: ‘Brethren, this matter is a trifle; and it makes really very little difference what a man thinks about the table of the Lord.’ Such indifferentism would have been far more deadly than all the divisions between the branches of the Church. A Luther who would have compromised with regard to the Lord’s Supper never would have said at the Diet of Worms, ‘Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise, God help me, Amen.’ Indifferentism about doctrine makes no heroes of the faith” (p. 42).

Some people would argue that all of Scripture is true but not equally important. I wonder if a better way to put it is that all of Scripture is equally true and equally important, though not all equally clear. Where there is confusion and lack of clarity, we allow our differences and don’t condemn one another as heretics. But that also means we patiently endure with one another through our differences—that we don’t poke fun or question one another’s faithfulness or love for God. We can raise real questions over interpretations, but we shouldn’t question one another’s heart motives unless we have good reason to. 

We can cling to the gospel while also holding tightly to our differences. Just because you feel passionately about eschatology or modes of worship or baptism doesn’t mean you’ve necessarily forgotten the gospel. And it doesn’t mean the person in the pew next to you has either. You can debate one another and share your differences, but you can do so without questioning their allegiance. Oftentimes, the reason a person is passionate about their secondary or tertiary issue is because their love for God is so grand that they want to make sure they are upholding his Word in the most faithful way possible as we saw with Luther and Zwingli. Don’t negate that when you engage with others. Respect the hard work it took to get to their position, and bear with them as Christ bears with your inconsistencies and bad interpretations every day. 

We should always be careful to not raise our secondary or tertiary beliefs to a place of primary importance. We should be careful that we don’t lose our focus on the gospel. But that doesn’t mean we should discard these beliefs and conversations either. God put those commands and nuances there for a reason, and part of upholding his Word is seeking to interpret it in the most faithful way possible. No, we should not deem one another as selfish or less faithful because they disagree with us, but we can still offer up a conversation to make sure we are all handling God’s Word with utmost care.

Of course we shouldn’t major on the minors. But we shouldn’t neglect them either, or make fun of those who seek to understand them and choose to take a stand on them. They aren’t wrong to do so, just as you aren’t wrong to take a stand on yours either. The problem isn’t in choosing theological sides, but in errors that create the differing sides. Machen wrote, “It is often said that the divided condition of Christendom is an evil, and so it is. But the evil consists in the existence of the errors which cause the divisions and not at all in the recognition of those errors when once they exist” (p. 42). Remember where the true battle lies: Not in out-smarting your brother or sister in the faith, but in upholding the truth of God. And that is my first step towards unity in theological differences. 

You May Also Enjoy…