Archive for October, 2007

h1

Communication and the Plan for United Cooperation

October 30, 2007

Communication is hard. Sometimes I blow it.

Rom 14:1-4 Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. One man’s faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

Over the past two years, as I have blogged for the cause of Christian unity, I have repeatedly gone to Romans 14 to show how Christians should handle disputable matters. Fundamentally, we should accept one another without passing judgment. That is not just a good idea, but a command from God. I have made that point often and I should know it well.

A couple of weeks ago I wrote a paper titled Why I Cannot Ratify the ICOC Plan for United Cooperation. In that paper, I tried to explain how I view that document and its effect on relationships between churches. In explaining that, I wrote:

… the document defines shared doctrinal beliefs and a federated organization of churches. Those who ratify the Plan will make up a functioning organization within the larger Christian church, through a system of delegates and regional discipling groups. The Plan defines who is in and who is out. Those who are in will interact and cooperate in a defined way. Those who are on the outside will be excluded from participation in many important ways. By definition, this is a faction within the body of Christ.

I continued by pointing out what Galatians 5 says about factions: that “those who create factions within the church will not inherit the kingdom of God.” (Gal 5:19-21).

Looking back at those words, I see that they communicate that the Plan puts the souls of all who ratified it in jeopardy–no if’s, and’s, or but’s. The way I wrote that, it sounds like I am passing judgment on all those who participate in the cooperation agreement. That is not what I intended. I apologize to all those who may have been hurt or offended by the words I wrote. Communication is hard, and this time I blew it.

Let me try to clarify. It does appear to me that the document has had the effect of creating a faction. But I might be wrong about that. People I love and respect disagree with me about the “faction” thing. Other people I love and respect see it as I do. So this question falls into the category of disputable matters. And I am committed to the principle of not passing judgment over disputable matters.

What I wanted to communicate is that, because it seems to me that a faction is formed by the Plan, therefore I cannot ratify the Plan in good conscience. That does not necessarily mean I am correct about factions. But as Paul said later in Romans 14:23, “But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.” That would be my state, if I were to ratify the Plan. Yet, I still must not pass judgment on my brothers who do not share my view on this disputable matter. And in all sincerity, I do not pass judgment on them. In fact I want to cooperate with them in all the ways that they are cooperating with each other–but somehow, without violating my conscience.

The task that remains is to find that way for people like me to cooperate without violating conscience. In the past few days I have had encouraging and constructive conversations with Mike Taliaferro and Roger Lamb about this task. In each of those conversations, we came to a common understanding of what will be necessary in order for people like me to cooperate. We all agreed that goal is within reach, and that we would work to reach that goal.

I think this is what Romans 14 looks like, in real flesh and blood. We have different views of a disputable matter, but we refuse to let that difference define our relationship. Instead we find a way to proceed together without violating conscience. It is not always easy. May God give us the humility and wisdom to finish the job so that we can proceed in full cooperation.

h1

Multiplying Churches

October 27, 2007

Outreach Magazine recently ranked the top 25 “multiplying churches” in America. The list includes five independent Christian churches , an encouraging fact for those of us in the Restoration Movement who share the same roots.

For this list, the term “multiplying church” means a church that plants other churches.

Today’s multiplying churches are adopting new ways of planting, as well as new principles. As they multiply themselves—taking care to instill a DNA of reproduction in each new church they plant—these churches are increasing their Kingdom impact.

Quoting from the article at the Christian Standard:

Researcher Ed Stetzer said, “Among churches today, the conversation—a long overdue one—is moving from church growth to kingdom growth.” The 25 churches were selected from more than 300 surveyed and were ranked based on the total number of church plants over the life of the church, the average number of churches planted each year, dollars and percentage of budget dedicated to church planting, the number of daughter churches that have planted a new church, and the church’s influence on the church-planting community. Included in the top 25 were five Christian churches. Each of the five churches has a unique story of impacting the kingdom through church planting.

Those of us from the ICOC are familiar with our own story of church plantings occurring over the past 25 years. I hope the above-linked articles encourage and inspire us to greater things in the future. God is not through yet!

h1

Taking Risks for Unity

October 25, 2007

A mainline church of Christ is hosting a joint service with an ICOC congregation:

We are hosting the International Church of Christ congregation here at our building Sunday. Their minister and I have been talking for a long time. He’s a wonderful man and a lover of God and Jesus. This great church wants to make an impact in the world. They are my brothers and sisters in Christ. Yet I have heard from several in the community (not our church) how they can’t believe we are hosting them.

It’s a shame that some people are not open to this sort of thing. I am convinced that our Lord wants us to do things like this. Kudos to these two congregations for ignoring the flack and setting a great example. And thanks to John for bringing this to my attention.

h1

Comment Moderation

October 25, 2007

I have reluctantly turned on comment moderation, due to inappropriate comments from a recent influx of readers. I have always been pretty open about what is permitted in comments on this site. In two years, I have only deleted one comment (a commercial spam comment) before today. But I do not want this site to turn into a forum for personal complaints against particular churches. There are other places where people can do that. If you wish to email me privately about such a matter I would be glad to respond privately.

h1

Something to Celebrate

October 24, 2007

The independent Christian churches have had a couple of great decades. From an article at the Christian Standard:

According to The New York Times, the Christian churches were the second-fastest-growing movement in America in the ’90s. Twenty years ago we had fewer than 10 churches that averaged 1,000 in attendance. Last year Christian Standard listed 117 averaging more than 1,000. There are eight churches exceeding 5,000! Some ridicule large churches and try to paint them all with a shallow brush, but those 117 churches baptized more than 20,000 people last year. If the angels of Heaven rejoice when one sinner comes to repentance, that’s reason for us to celebrate. (excerpted from Bob Russell’s closing sermon at the North American Christian Convention in Kansas City, July 6)

I would say that is something to celebrate. Let’s celebrate with them!

h1

Christians Only

October 23, 2007

I ran across the following today, and thought it was worthy of a “me too” post:

“I ask that men make no reference to my name, and call themselves not Lutherans, but Christians. What is Luther? My doctrine, I am sure, is not mine, nor have I been crucified for anyone. St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 3, would not allow Christians to call themselves Pauline or Petrine, but Christian. How then should I, poor, foul carcass that I am, come to have men give to the children of Christ a name derived from my worthless name? No, no, my dear friends, let us abolish all party names, and call ourselves Christians after him whose doctrine we have.” – Martin Luther

“I should rejoice (so little ambitious am I to be at the head of any sect or party) if the very name [Methodist] might never be mentioned more, but be buried in eternal oblivion.” -John Wesley

“I say of the Baptist name, let it perish, but let Christ’s name last for ever. I look forward with pleasure to the day when there will not be a Baptist living.” -Charles Haddon Spurgeon

from Some Thoughts on Unity posted by Phil Miller on Sunday, 16 September 2007

h1

Observations

October 18, 2007

I’ve received a wide range of responses to my previous post, and to several private conversations about the topic of the ICOC Plan for United Cooperation.

By far most of the responses I have received have been expressing agreement with my concerns. That might be because of the type of folks who are regular readers of this blog. But regardless, it indicates that these views are shared by many people in many places.

One responder thought that I should have been more clear that I was only stating my own personal view, and that I was not speaking for anyone else. I thought I had made that clear, but perhaps I could have been more clear about it. Certainly, on a controversial topic like this one, people don’t want faulty assumptions to be made about their personal views. That is one reason I wanted to express my own views clearly and publicly.

Some of those who have ratified the Plan have nevertheless shown kindness and understanding toward me and my views. They have made a sincere effort to understand why I feel this way, and have not acted as though they thought my views are completely without merit. They have insisted that they will not let the Plan interfere with our relationship. They have acknowledged that the Plan document is imperfect and should not be a criterion for cooperation. Some ratifiers have even expressed that they believe the Plan document has outlived its usefulness.

Some of the responses from ratifiers puzzle me. They argue they had no intention of creating a faction, and that the cooperation they call for is a good thing. For them, it seems that the end justifies the means. I fully acknowledge that they did not set out to create a faction. But to me, it is an observable fact that there is a faction as a result of the Plan. As a result there is a line in the sand, with the two groups harboring uneasy feelings toward each other. There are disrespectful comments being thrown around in both directions over this issue. It does not have to be like this. I fully agree that there are worthy efforts on which we could cooperate. We can accomplish that end through better means. Let’s take the document out of the way so that anyone who wishes can cooperate on those good works.

Several of the ratifiers have indicated that they will call or otherwise communicate with me about the document, or have been asked to do so by third parties, but have not yet done so. I want to believe that they are just busy with other issues in their lives, and that they will make the effort to communicate in the near future. In my more cynical moments I fear that they are avoiding what they think may be a difficult conversation. Life is easier when you don’t have to communicate with people who hold opposing views. Of course a Christian (and especially a minister or elder) does not have the option of avoiding such conversations. But maybe they view this conversation as one they can avoid. I would like to encourage those folks to give me a call. It will not be a difficult conversation. I have neither delusions nor intentions to persuade them that their view is wrong and mine is right. I only want to discuss how we can cooperate despite the disagreement. My views are a matter of public record. If my paper persuades someone, fine. But I do not intend to be a pain about it. So please call. Let’s make every effort toward unity. I promise to be nice!

I have seen evidence that there is an undercurrent of unhealthy attitudes towards other congregations on the topic of the Plan, in many if not all of our congregations. Several speakers at the ILC made derogatory public comments about non-ratifying churches. That is the tip of the iceberg. What is being said publicly is also being said privately. Those public comments tend to spread and give legitimacy to those unhealthy attitudes, on both sides of the issue. We need to stop the unhealthy talk.

I will continue to support cooperation with other congregations. I would like to cooperate with the ratifying congregations on many levels. But I cannot give my allegiance to anyone but Christ, and I cannot endorse any standard for life and doctrine other than the Scriptures. With that in mind, I will cooperate with those congregations to whatever extent they permit.

h1

ILC and the Plan for United Cooperation

October 11, 2007

Update Sept 20, 2009: We are affirming the August 2009 revision of the cooperation plan.

Update, Tuesday October 30: I’ve posted a clarification and apology for leaving the impression that I was passing judgment on those who ratified the agreement.

Update, Saturday October 27: See my more recent article appealing for a solution, posted at Mission Memo.

The following is a paper I submitted this morning to be considered for publishing at Disciples Today: (pdf)

Why I Cannot Ratify

the ICOC Plan for United Cooperation

Alan Rouse


Introduction

I have just returned from the 2007 International Leadership Conference in Los Angeles. The past few days have been filled with inspiring messages, practical teaching, vibrant singing, and encouraging fellowship. As always, the fellowship with much-loved brothers and sisters was the highlight of the conference. I am very encouraged to confirm that we continue to share all of the important things in common. We hold to the same core doctrine. We are striving toward the same goal and are engaged in the same mission. We are facing many of the same challenges. We continue to learn from one another as we try various ways to meet the needs in each of our home congregations. I believe God is at work in every church. He is not finished with any of us yet. We are His sons and daughters, and for that reason we are united.

Throughout the conference, both in the scheduled sessions and in the fellowship, the Plan for United Cooperation was a frequently visited topic. Roughly 70% of the former ICOC congregations have ratified the Plan. Based on public comments by speakers as well as on numerous side conversations at the ILC, it is clear that many of those who have ratified the Plan do not understand why 30% of the churches have chosen not to ratify. The natural human tendency is to fill that void of understanding by assuming the worst. Those negative assumptions can destroy the unity between churches. While I cannot speak for all those who have not ratified the Plan, I believe it would be better for the sake of unity to explain why I cannot ratify. It is in that spirit that I am writing this paper.

Creating a faction

The first sentence in the Plan for United Cooperation states:

The purpose of the following paper is to affirm and enhance the unity of the family of churches known, since 1992, as the International Churches of Christ.

To accomplish that purpose, the document defines shared doctrinal beliefs and a federated organization of churches. Those who ratify the Plan will make up a functioning organization within the larger Christian church, through a system of delegates and regional discipling groups. The Plan defines who is in and who is out. Those who are in will interact and cooperate in a defined way. Those who are on the outside will be excluded from participation in many important ways. By definition, this is a faction within the body of Christ.

Creating a faction within the church is a very serious matter. The Holy Spirit, through the apostle Paul, warns us that those who create factions within the church will not inherit the kingdom of God (Gal 5:19-21).

The church in Corinth was going down this road, forming factions behind Paul, Peter, and Apollos, different leaders with different styles and methods. Note that these men all believed in Jesus, called Jesus their Lord, and proclaimed the same gospel. But there were differences of style and method. And factions were forming based on those differences.

This lead to Paul’s admonitions in the first four chapters of the first Corinthian letter. Paul wrote that they must have no divisions among them, despite their acknowledged differences in style and method. In 1 Cor 3:10-15, Paul lays down the standard for dealing with different approaches to church building. First, there can be only one foundation, and that is Christ. But there can be variations in the manner of building on that foundation. Some methods are superior to others. The superior methods are determined, not by short term results, but by being tested by fire on the Day. Then in chapter 4 he says:

1Co 4:5 Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men’s hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.


1Co 4:6 Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not take pride in one man over against another.


Paul admonished the Corinthians to stop aligning behind certain leaders, and to stop passing judgment on their methods. Likewise, we are to accept those who practice different methods of church-building, without passing judgment. And we are instructed not to form factions based on such differences.

Christian Unity and the Plan


Gal 3:26-29 You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

It was wonderful to witness nine people being added to the church on Sunday afternoon of the ILC. Nine precious souls were added to the Lord’s church as they made Jesus their Lord and were immersed in water for the forgiveness of sins and to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Before being baptized, each person in turn was asked the same two questions. First, they were asked if they believe the basic gospel facts about Jesus. Then they were asked to confess that Jesus is their Lord. They were not asked their position on the Plan. They were not asked what they believe about the role of women in the church, nor about their position on divorce and remarriage, nor about any other issue on which we might have a strong opinion. They were only asked those two questions about Jesus. That is consistent with biblical instructions about salvation:

Mar 16:15-16 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.


Rom 10:9 That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.


Making Jesus Lord encompasses repentance. It goes beyond simple repentance, because when Jesus is Lord you will continue to repent in the future, each time you become aware of a new area of sin in your life. Becoming a son of God does not require knowing every matter over which one needs to repent. What it does require is a commitment to continue to learn the Lord’s will and to obey what is being learned.

So Christian conversion involves three things:

  1. belief in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus as an atoning sacrifice for our sins;

  2. making Jesus the Lord of your life; and

  3. being baptized into Jesus.

As stated in Gal 3:26-29, when we do that we become sons of God. All who have done so are one in Christ Jesus, and are heirs of the promise of God. And all who are sons of God are our brothers in Christ.

The members of our family of congregations are not the only ones who have done this. We are not the only sons of God. In fact, we are only a small minority of those who have been adopted as sons of God. In particular, the mainline churches of Christ and the independent Christian churches teach the same conversion doctrine. Those who have obeyed that same gospel are our brothers and sisters in Christ. We have no right to treat any of them as second class members of the family. It may well be true that we have discovered some more effective methods and materials for building a church (although our losses in recent years suggest that improvements were needed!) But as I’ve already discussed, we are prohibited from forming factions based on preferred methodologies. So we must not build walls between us and them. We must not define a faction excluding them.


To bring about unity among all Christians (that’s what we all want, right?), we need to take down barriers and to eliminate unnecessary distinctions between groups of Christians. The Plan for United Cooperation does the opposite.

As one who has made Jesus Lord, I cannot in good conscience ratify a document that, in my view, creates a faction in the church. This is a matter of conscience and a salvation issue for me. Those who would persuade me to ratify anyway are urging me to place myself under the condemnation of Romans 14:

Rom 14:19-23 Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall. So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.


United Cooperation


The churches in the southeast never stopped being united and cooperating during the past few years, despite the fact that these churches have not ratified the Plan. We continue to take up special contributions to support missions. We meet periodically to discuss funding for missions in Africa and the Caribbean. We have sent members to visit churches we are helping in Africa. We have brought in speakers from around the world to share with our congregation. We have jointly organized and attended multiple regional conferences, both for leaders and for the whole membership. Each summer our children come together from these same congregations to attend a summer camp together, as members from these congregations take time off work to work in the kitchen and in many other ways to make the camp experience a success. The elders from my congregation have visited with the elders of one of these churches in another state to share experiences and encourage one another. Leaders from several of these churches are attending the Athens Institute of Ministry together to deepen their understanding of God’s Word. We have had joint services with some of the nearer congregations. We have had joint teen activities, joint campus activities, joint single activities… All of these things continue to take place without the need to sign a document written by men.

The Way Forward


I completely trust the motives of those who proposed the Plan for United Cooperation, and those who have ratified it. I ask for the same trust in return. There were some important goals that I believe motivated the Plan, including a desire to continue providing needed support for missions, to sharpen one another through discipling relationships, and to encourage one another to continue carrying out the Great Commission. I think we would all be better off to stop talking about the Plan for United Cooperation, and to talk instead about those important goals behind the Plan. The Plan, while well-intentioned, is an obstacle for some of us. In the spirit of love, I appeal to the ratifiers of the Plan to include the non-ratifiers in the process, and to take the obstacle out of the way.

h1

Back from the ILC

October 11, 2007

I’ve just returned home from the International Leadership Conference in Los Angeles. I was only willing to pay for one day of hotel internet access ($12.95) which I did on Monday, so I’m now backlogged on my blogging and email. Please bear with me as I get caught up. I plan soon to have some comments on the conference itself, the status of the ICOC PLan for United Cooperation, and some other unity-related observations from the conference.

h1

Authorized Worship

October 3, 2007

I’ve been enjoying Jay Guin’s series on instrumental music lately. In part 3 of the series, he makes a very astute point about what is authorized in worship, from 1 Cor 14.

Traditionally, the churches of Christ have taught that there are five authorized “acts of worship”: singing, praying, preaching, giving, and communion. Biblical support for these acts of worship in the general assembly can be found in the first Corinthian letter:

  1. Singing (1 Cor 14:26)
  2. Praying (1 Cor 14:14-15)
  3. Preaching (1 Cor 14:26)
  4. Giving (1 Cor 16:2)
  5. Communion (1 Cor 11:20-34)

Of course, since churches of Christ hold that the spiritual gifts of prophecy and tongues have passed away, Paul’s discussion of those matters has generally been considered not to be relevant to the modern church.

Notice, however, that Paul was answering the question, “What activities are permissible in the assembly?” In each case he applies the rule that whatever is done must build up the church.

1Co 14:12-13 So it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that build up the church. For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says.

1Co 14:26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.

Paul applied this principle to tongues and prophecy, but also to singing and to instruction. His entire argument about tongues is this: Whatever does not edify, is worthless in the assembly. It seems that the purpose of the assembly is to edify the Christians.

That is consistent with what the writer of Hebrews taught:

Heb 10:23-25 Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another–and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

Christians come together as a church in order to encourage one another. That is the purpose of the assembly. God gave us the “worship” assembly for our benefit, not His.

Notice also, as Paul answered the question “What activities are permissible in the assembly?” he did not ask “What acts has God authorized?” Instead he asked, “What edifies the church?” Clearly, whatever builds up the church is authorized by God. God wants the church to be edified. In other words, He wants the church to be brought to a better understanding of the gospel of Jesus, and to be urged to respond appropriately to what God has done for us through Jesus. As Paul wrote in Ephesians:

Eph 4:11-16 It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.

What does all this mean practically? First, it means that we must do everything in a way that builds up the church. The traditional five acts of worship can be done in a manner that builds up the church, or in a manner that bypasses the gospel of Jesus completely. Everything done in worship should be focused on the gospel.

Secondly, other things done in the assembly can build up the church, besides the traditional five. In his article, Jay points out that even the announcements can encourage the church to do good works:

But aren’t [announcements] encouragements to love and good works? Don’t they include messages about who is in the hospital or had a baby or jobs that need to be filled? Or maybe they are celebrations about someone’s work in the church or an anniversary. It’s all encouragement!

Similarly, the fellowship before and after the formal assembly is an opportunity to encourage one another and to urge one another to love and to good works. Surely that kind of fellowship is authorized as an activity of service (worship) in the assembly!

So we need a broader view of what is permissible in the church service. The rule has nothing to do with five authorized acts of worship. Instead it concerns whether or not those things build up the church in the gospel. From the perspective of unity, it means that we certainly shouldn’t be drawing lines of fellowship over things like communion cups, instrumental music, dramatic productions, videos, praise teams, etc. Whatever edifies the church in the gospel is permissible.