Threads from Henry's Web

Tag: Christian unity

  • When I Dream of Christian Unity

    When I Dream of Christian Unity

    Everybody, well almost, says they want Christian unity. It’s one of those Sunday School answers. It’s like saying, “Everybody who loves Jesus raise your hand” in a Sunday School class.

    But when you raise your hand for Christian unity, what do you mean? What is your vision?

    I’ve been thinking of this as I hear various people talk, and asking myself what I would hope for. We can easily be just as disunited about unity as we are about anything else!

    It seems to me that there are several possible aspects of unity, and not all of them necessarily work together.

    • Unity of spirit, i.e., we tend to respond in similar ways to similar issues. We may have somewhat different viewpoints, but we get along. Actual unified beliefs may be clearly defined, or they may just be a general set of feelings.
    • Unity of doctrine, where we all accept the same statement of beliefs.
    • Unity of organization, in which we all fall under one umbrella.

    I’m sure I could come up with more if I spent time. I might also distinguish any sort of unity as inward or outward looking. Inward looking unity unites us (as we define us) against them, while outward looking unity unites us because we can thus better serve both us and them. These are kind of polar opposites, and most actual cases would fall variously between.

    When talking about Christian unity, however, we also have to consider what it is we are uniting. This might fall under unity of doctrine, but it could also be classified as unity of culture. We can end up calling for unity of all conservative evangelicals, just plain evangelicals, liberals/progressives, charismatics, pentecostals, etc., because in our minds that is what “Christian” is. I’ve encountered people who sought the unity of everyone who believes in Jesus. After all, believing in Jesus, they tell me, is all that matters. But when you drill down, they mean very specific things by “believing in Jesus,” such as believing in Jesus in the sense of penal substitutionary atonement.

    I say all this to suggest that we do need to think, and hopefully think clearly, about what we mean when we call for unity.

    I like the use of metaphors in discussing this, and two metaphors came to my mind as I thought about writing this post. First, dancing. You might think of a dance school or even a dance conference or gathering of some sort. The way I see this is that there are a myriad of things that are called dance, and one person might even think what someone else does isn’t really dancing. At a school or a large gathering, you will likely have a variety of styles, from individual displays to large groups. You’ll find different styles of choreography. Everybody dances, as they see it. There’s a structure and an organization, but the boundaries are blurred as some creative people break the rules. As long as nobody gets violent, everyone can have fun.

    Missouri River Sunset – Credit: Openclipart.org

    Second, I see a river. The river has tributaries, currents, eddies, changes of channel over time, turns, blockages, and may even, as it arrives at the sea, divide into a river delta. A water molecule may take many different roads along the river path, but in general, the water gets to the sea.

    These two metaphors speak two me of common purpose and destination, with intervening differences. They also save me, I think, from going to far in defining someone else’s unity. (I want you to feel the internal contraction is assigning ownership of unity to a person, of a unity of different unities.) You can be a middle of the river water molecule or one who tries all the currents and eddies or spends time in quiet pools near the shore as the river meanders along. You can be in the contests for the traditional dances, or out playing with styles that are seeking recognition. You might get dipped out of the river and used for someone’s shower or bath, or even to flush a toilet before you get back to the river. Gotta love mixing those metaphors, or at least stirring them.

    What is your vision of unity?

  • Two Things that Lead Toward Christian Unity

    There are two things I’ve noticed in my own life and in the lives of people I know that tend to lead toward less divisiveness and greater Christian unity. These are:

    1) A focus on doing mission

    2) A focus on the study of scripture

    What’s interesting is that people can differ on how to do mission or how to study scripture, but if they’re spending their time doing more than talking, their talking starts to focus less on their differences. Sometimes they do change their point of view on certain theological issues, but more often it’s a matter of focus.

    I wonder what would happen if we simply spent more time going to scripture and then carrying out the mission as we see God calling us to it, and less time correcting one another, that we might find that God will change all of us.

     And all of us, with unveiled faces, seeing the glory of the Lord as though reflected in a mirror, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord, the Spirit. — 2 Corinthians 3:18 (NRSV)

    (Note: I do believe both of these things must be done prayerfully.)

  • Finding and Protecting the Essentials

    I’ve written several times before about looking for the essentials of the Christian faith, most recently in my discussion of what a successful United Methodist Church would look like.

    I maintain that it is important to identify what are essentials, and to have a well-selected set that will provide identity for an organization. Of course, when we’re talking about church doctrines we hope to deal with essential doctrines that are also true and central to understanding our faith.

    If we make too many things essential, we tend to become narrow and divisive. If we make nothing, or too few things essential, we tend to have confusion. I think the United Methodist Church is in the latter situation in many ways.

    Of course the difficulty is identifying what is essential. I don’t believe this is necessarily easy, but we need to give it thought. Too often we simply think about what we believe and then sort of drift about in terms of what we believe is really essential.

    Eric Carpenter has taken on this topic in his own way, and titles his post Call Heresy What it is, but Only if it’s Heresy.

    Eric discusses both sides of the equation–too many essentials, and none at all–though he doesn’t use those terms. Regarding calling people with more minor disagreements “heretics” he says:

    We should never be calling others who are in Christ heretics.

    Then he discusses essential doctrines and concludes:

    Refusing to call heresy what it is leads to a lack of perceived boundaries between the gospel and the world. It suggests that everyone is really the same in their relationship to God. It strongly implies that gospel proclamation doesn’t really matter.

    Dave Black, in linking to Eric’s post, puts it this way:

    He is right. To be a Christian today we must have the heart of a child and the rind of a rhinoceros. The danger is that along with standing for the truth we will harden our hearts toward people. There are some teachings in the church today that are not to be accepted but rather challenged and (hopefully) corrected. In all of this, however, the serpent’s wisdom must be balanced by the innocent of the dove. God grant us balance.

    I hope more Christian bloggers will start to talk about this issue. We may find it had to agree on a solid list, but I think it’s very beneficial to ask ourselves regarding each area of disagreement: Is this critical to the gospel? Then we can continue to discuss non-essentials, but we won’t let them become divisive.