Christian Unity

In the words of Dorothy from The Wizard of Oz, “There’s no place like home!”

That’s not to say we didn’t thoroughly enjoy our trip. Actually, we took two trips–one to the mountains, and one to visit a church in the Triangle area of NC.

My wife and I spent six days in the Appalachian foothills of South Carolina, walking mountain trails to about ten different waterfalls and taking in some magnificent scenery. We encountered a variety of wildlife (various snakes, lizards, a blue heron, hawks, vultures, miscellaneous other birds, squirrels, something like a weasel or river otter, but — surprisingly — no deer). That’s my idea of a great vacation!

On the first weekend, we visited a mainline church of Christ in a small town in the area. There was a good age distribution in the congregation, though there were more over-60 folks than I am used to seeing. The attendance was a little over 100. The congregation has four elders and is in the process of appointing a fifth (a couple of the elders are facing some health issues). Singing was a cappella, consisting of familiar old church hymns. We like that. The preacher was young, in his late 20’s. He preached a good sermon on 1 Cor 10:13. After service, one of their zones hosted a covered dish lunch for visitors, which we enjoyed very much.

On Thursday we returned home for our own congregation’s midweek service, joined up with the other elder and his wife, and travelled Friday to the Triangle area of NC to visit with the elders of the Triangle Church, a congregation that shares the same recent history and heritage as our own. We stayed with one of their deacons, a family that has been best friends of ours for 25 years. On Saturday we spent many hours visiting and talking with their elders and one of their ministers. It was very obvious that our two congregations have a tremendous amount in common, both in our strengths and in our weaknesses. We exchanged thoughts and approaches to address the needs in our two congregations.

On the second Sunday we attended the service of the west region of the Triangle church. Like the congregation we visited the previous week, the singing was a cappella. But this time it was a mixture of old hymns and more contemporary songs. The sermon was interactive, with a roving microphone being passed to individuals in the congregation who wished to share a scripture or a thought on the subject. The topic was an introspective look at worship and connecting with God. Overall the flavor of the service was more “post-modern” than the previous week. But it was deeply spiritual.

Returning home, we were very tired, but it was a “good tired.” That is typical of my vacations. I’m really haven’t figured out how to have a restful vacation! So it’s good to be home.

P.S. I’ll be very busy for the next three weeks as I prepare for taking the CISSP certification exam. Please pray for me!

It’s time for this blogger to take a vacation! So I’ll be away from my computer for awhile. During that time my wife and I plan to hike a few mountain trails (mainly the level ones!), take in some great scenery, and relax. We plan to visit a church this weekend from another branch of the Restoration Movement (location TBD). The following weekend, if final details can be worked out, we’ll be visiting with the elders of the Triangle congregation in North Carolina, to enjoy a small reunion, to encourage one another, and to share experiences. The other elder from my home congregation and his wife plan to meet us there for the weekend. Hopefully this will be a time of growth as we all learn from one another’s experiences.

I’ll be posting on the blog again in about two weeks. “See you then!”

Recently I ran across an amazing quote from Alexander Campbell, taken from “Debate on Human Creeds” between Campbell and his Presbyterian opponent, N. L. Rice.

It is not the object of our efforts to make men think alike on a thousand themes. Let men think as they please on any matters of human opinion, and upon ‘doctrines of religion,’ provided only they hold the head Christ, and keep his commandments. I have learned, not only the theory, but the fact, that if you wish opinionism to cease or subside, you must not call up and debate every thing that men think or say. You may debate anything into consequence, or you may, by a dignified silence, waste it into oblivion. I have known innumerable instances of persons outliving their opinions, and erroneous reasonings, and even sometimes forgetting the modes of reasoning by which they had embraced or sustained them. This was the natural result of the philosopy of letting them alone. In this way, they came to be of one mind in all points in which unity of thought is desirable, in order to unity of worship and of action.

About a century later, W. Carl Ketcherside quoted the above statement in a Mission Messenger article, describing it as “one of the most significant statements I have ever read.” (Thanks to Phil at restorationunity.com for pointing out to another great article at the Christian Standard where I first found this quote).

Anyone who has read this blog for very long knows that I frequently appeal to 2 Tim 2:24-26 as an important divine instruction for addressing disagreements in the church. I think the above comment from Campbell illustrates very well the wisdom behind Paul’s admonition to Timothy and to the rest of us. Rather than debating every point, and arrogantly demanding that all submit to our views, we need to be patient with one another while God works to bring us to unity.

I continue to be fascinated and deeply encouraged to find that this was the mindset of the founders of the Restoration Movement. Let’s return to those roots!

There is an encouraging article at the Christian Standard about unity efforts in Lubbock, Texas. Quoting from the article:

I know from this experience it is possible to be united in spite of our differences. Such unity does not require the sacrifice of any honest convictions. We at Quaker Avenue are still a non-Sunday school church. And while we are cooperating with the Christian churches in town, we are still an a cappella congregation.

It is true we don’t make the same harsh, legalistic arguments against our brethren on these issues, but loving them does not mean capitulation. We are united in Christ, on the great facts of the gospel, while remaining free to study and interpret the Scripture and its implications for ourselves, as a free congregation in Christ.

It’s great to hear that others are beating the same drum… and are actually doing something about it!

From time to time I have conversations with people who used to be part of the churches of Christ, but have left due to the perceived legalistic approach to the scriptures. Often these folks have renounced the belief that baptism is necessary in order to receive the forgiveness of sins. Emotions on the subject run deep, and are often a significant obstacle to progress toward reconciliation and unity.

It is not my purpose in writing this to defend my beliefs about conversion. But to avoid confusion I want to be clear that I do believe the scriptures teach that God grants forgiveness at baptism. I base this upon the usual passages (there are many), especially Acts 2:38 and Acts 22:16. I grew up in an independent “free will” Baptist church where the teaching was not incompatible with this belief, but I became convinced of it in college through the campus ministry of a church of Christ. Since then, thirty years of Bible study have ony reinforced that belief. And thirty years of studying the Bible with my friends have shown me that many others are equally convinced of the opposing belief.

These opposing views appear to be an impregnable wall preventing unity. Each side presents a caricature of the other side’s views, portraying their opponents as ridiculously dishonest with the scriptures. Instead of showing respect for one another, and seeking areas of agreement, both sides exhibit a preference for disputing and quarrelling. We appear to love the fight more than we love peace.

Both sides cannot be right. The two positions are mutually exclusive. But it is quite possible that neither side is exactly right. There might be some truth to be learned from both points of view. That statement may raise the blood pressure of the “true believers” on both sides of the issue, those who do not want to give an inch to those they consider their adversaries. To many people, in order to feel resolved in their own minds, everything needs to be clear-cut, black and white. They must find a definitive answer to every question. That is not the kind of world God has created. If we are honest with ourselves, we must admit that we do not understand everything in the scriptures. (If you truly understand every passage on baptism, please explain 1 Cor 15:29 to me!) It takes humility and faith to admit we don’t know something. Humility is required because not knowing everything means we are fallible. Faith is required because we must rely on God to accept us despite our failures. Some things are beyond our control. We don’t know it all.

If we could be humble and have that kind of faith, I think we could find significant common ground on the issue of baptism. Hopefully most people on both sides of the question could agree on what is stated verbatim in scripture. Could a Baptist quote Acts 2:38-39 as an invitation, without caveats, as Peter did? If not, why not? Could a church of Christ preacher quote Rom 10:9-10 in instructions to a church, as Paul did, without going into disputes about conversion? Can we just let the scriptures speak for themselves?

It is what we infer and deduce based on scripture that gets us into trouble. It is not surprising that people draw differing conclusions from what is written in scripture. God knows what we are made of. He could have presented things in a way that we could not mistake. I t was not an accident that he gave us the scriptures in the way he did. I believe he gave us the scriptures in a way that requires us to ponder, to digest, to work at understanding. I think God wants us to experience lifelong learning. To continue to learn throughout your life requires great humility. Pride is the enemy of learning. When we draw our conclusions from scripture, pride causes us to love our conclusions and inferences as much as the scriptures themselves. We confuse the two, because of our pride.

We (both sides) have drawn lines of fellowship based on what we infer from the scriptures, as if our inferences were infallible, the very Word of God. Let’s resolve not to do that any longer. Let’s unite on the scriptures, and the scriptures alone. If we’ll do that, I believe the Holy Spirit will bring us to the unity for which Jesus prayed.

A recent post at restorationheritage.com led me to an interesting article by Joe Beam titled “What’s Happening to Churches of Christ?” The article is a few years old but describes dynamics that are likely to persist for some time. He describes a framework for understanding the various points of view within these churches, which is worthy of our attention.

He describes four types of churches, made up of six types of people. These types (churches and people) range from very inclusive to very exclusive in their view of people outside their type.

Starting from the most inclusive (left) and moving to the most exclusive (right), the four groups of churches are: Left Wing, Innovative, Traditional, and Right Wing.

Similarly, the six groups of members are: Exasperated, Open, Cautious, Searching, Satisfied, and Zealots.

For a more detailed description of the groups and their relationships, see the original article.

Reading Joe Beam’s article, I cannot help but be reminded of the Sand Creek Address and Declaration. In the Zealot group we have a group of very conservative Christians with a very exclusive view of the “true church” and “ancient paths”, much like Daniel Sommer and his followers in 1889. The article suggests that the Zealots sometimes celebrate when the Exasperateds leave their fellowship. That also carries the haunting echos of Daniel Sommer in the immediate aftermath of the Sand Creek event.

Then in the Exasperated group we have a group that is, well, exasperated with the narrow views of the Zealots. And you have several grades of people in-between who would like to hold things together but are finding that to be increasingly difficult–much like David Lipscomb and others who wanted to find an alternative to division 117 years ago. It seems likely that the two extremes will part company, in one way or another. It remains to be seen whether the middle can hold together, and if so, what it will look like on the other side.

I see similar factors at work in the former ICOC congregations, though from where I sit it seems that these churches are not in the same degree of crisis as the “churches of Christ” now face.

Given my strong convictions about Christian Unity, I find this whole situation very distressing. As Daniel Sommer later said after his change of heart, in the proposal known as the Rough Draft, “Can’t we all agree on something?” Specifically, once God has adopted someone as his son, he becomes a brother to all the other sons God has adopted. It has nothing to do with how many correct doctrinal positions he holds, nor with how many of the “ancient paths” he has understood correctly. He may be wrong about many things. But he is a brother to everyone who has been adopted by God. It is not our responsibility, nor our right, to attempt to purify the church by division. That is as true for the Exasperateds as for the Zealots.

Let’s learn the lessons of history. We’ve seen this movie before.

A quick search of the blogsphere will demonstrate that there are conflicting views about what Christian unity ought to be. Some are eagerly pursuing unity with everyone who claims to be Christian. Others are distressed by this, arguing that unity which God approves cannot overlook errors in doctrine. Some are making great efforts to forge unity with other groups. Others say that unity cannot be created through human effort, but must be created by God. Some consider the pursuit of unity to be the top priority for Christians today. Others speak of the “unity cult,” alleging that those pursuing unity comprise yet one more faction in the church.

Let’s look at some scriptures.

Gal 3:26-27
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.

What makes us one in Christ is that we were all adopted as God’s sons by faith at the time we were baptized. That is the common denominator upon which biblical unity is built. We are brothers because God adopted us as sons. Those are the people with whom we should have unity.

John 17:20-23
“My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

Jesus prayed for his followers to be one, to be “brought to complete unity” (KJV “may be made perfect in one”). This was his prayer to God, so obviously God has a decisive role in bringing it about. But he didn’t say “Father, make them perfect in one.” Rather he asked that they “be made perfect in one.” So it sounds like there is a third party involved. Who might that be? The scriptures give us the answer.

Eph 4:11-13
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.

Paul makes it clear that unity does depend in some measure upon the labor of the shepherds, teachers, and others who work to build up the body of Christ. Through their work the church becomes prepared for works of service. These are the things that enable the members of the church to “reach unity in the faith…”

Note also that the church doesn’t start out with unity in the faith. It has to be brought to that point, in a process that takes time (“until we all reach…”). The expectation was that the Christians would live peacefully together despite their differences, as they go through the process that would bring them to complete unity. So peace should precede unity, and should lead us to unity as the various parts of the church perform their God-given roles.

The first step toward unity is peace. We should be peacemakers (Matt 5:9). We should seek peace and pursue it (1 Pet 3:11, Psalm 34:14). Peacemakers who sow in peace reap a harvest of righteousness (James 3:18).

Where I’ve experienced unity, it has been a beautiful thing. But the process that brings us from disunity to unity can be unnerving, frightening, even painful at times. It takes us from an area where we are comfortable, to another place that is previously unknown to us. Like Abraham, we are called to leave our home and travel to a land that God will show us later. That takes great faith.

So in the interest of unity, let’s be peacemakers. Let’s be patient with those who are fearful of the journey. And let’s not put obstacles in one another’s path as we seek to reach unity.

First, I want to apologize to anyone who has had trouble loading my blog recently. I am hosting my own site outside of blogger.com, but loading my blog still relies upon at least some parts of blogger.com being available. Reliability and performance of blogger.com have left a lot to be desired lately. Today, publishing and blog maintenance at blogger.com have been down due to database problems (though my site itself does still work, at least at the moment…). You’re reading this because Blogger publishing has come back up. Hopefully this won’t be an ongoing problem.

Anyway…

Today I feel like addressing a lighter subject. Since this blog is focused on Christian Unity, I am naturally interested in who might be searching for content on that subject, and thus finding their way here. So let’s see who is dropping by!

The Site Meter counter at the bottom of the page provides me some data about recent visitors to this site. One piece of data it provides is where the visitor is located. Don’t get too paranoid–it’s just a best-effort approximation, which narrows the location down to a city if possible. Anyway out of the last 100 visits, it provides me with 64 unique sources of the visitors. Most of these are in the US, representing 26 different states, with California and Texas tied for the most distinct cities represented. The past 100 visitors included seven different countries, with Canada leading the non-US pack. There have been quite a few other countries, US states, and cities represented in the past (prior to this sample) but these are the ones that are currently showing up.

Many of these visitors found the site by searching on msn.com or google. Often the search terms are very “Restoration Movement” centric (CENI, silence of the scriptures, Carl Ketcherside, Thomas Campbell, etc). But also some arrive here looking for more general Christian subjects (christian unity, resolving church conflicts, sola scriptura, etc). Many others are referred here by a link at other blogs, particularly pinakidion.com, salguod.net, clarkecomments.com, restorationunity.com, and theoccasionalopinion.blogspot.com.

Anyway, I thought folks might enjoy browsing the list. So here it is–the locations of the last 100 visitors to this site:

US
Montgomery Al
Phoenix, Az
Hot Springs National Park, Ark
Clovis, Ca
Gilroy, Ca
Lake Isabella, Ca
Palo Alto, Ca
Redlands, Ca
San Fernando, Ca
San Lorenzo, Ca
Sunnyvale, Ca
Denver, Co
Stamford, Conn
Palm Bay, Fl
Tampa, Fl
Fayetteville, Ga
Lawrenceville, Ga
Duluth, Ga
Indianapolis, In
Roachdale, In
Salina, Ka
Elizabethtown, Ky
Louisville, Ky
Standish, Me
Boston Ma
Sault Sainte Marie, Mi
Hastings, Mn
Kansas City, Mo
Vicksburg Ms
Granite Falls, NC
Kannapolis, NC
Morehead City, NC
Research Triangle Park, NC
Omaha, Ne
Henrietta, NY
New Hyde Park, NY
Galloway, Oh
Broken Arrow, Ok
Newcastle, Ok
Portland, Ore
Allentown, Pa
Brookville, Pa
Nashville, Tn
Amarillo, Tx
Arlington, Tx
Beaumont, Tx
Dallas, Tx
Larue, Tx
Lubbock, Tx
Midlothian, Tx
San Antonio, Tx
Richmond Va
Richland, Wa

Non-US
Rhodes, New South Wales, Australia
Abbotsford, BC, Canada
Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Oakville, Ontario, Canada
Abidjan, Ivory Coast
Bruchkbel, Germany
Ilbenstadt, Germany
Kolonnawa, Sri Lanka
Sandridge, Norfolk, UK
Billingham, Stockton-on-Tees, UK

On Saturday my wife and I, along with one of our daughters, had the opportunity to view the Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit at Discovery Place in Charlotte NC. This exhibit continues through the end of May. Tickets must be purchased in advance for a particular time slot. We entered around 3:15 and spent about an hour and a half in the exhibit.

The exhibit included fragments of ten actual scrolls, including excerpts from five books of our Bible (Genesis, Leviticus, Numbers, Psalm, Isaiah) plus fragments from a commentary on Nahum and from several secular and apocryphal works. All the scroll fragments dated from around a century before Christ.

The exhibit began with a short movie, followed by a series of exhibits showing where the scrolls were discovered, some related archeological information and how they have been handled and studied. I found it particularly interesting that they are using DNA testing to match up fragments that are written on skin from the same animal, in hopes that some of the smaller fragments can be assembled to recreate the contents of the original document.

Before entering the Gallery of Scrolls section where the actual scroll fragments were displayed, there were several replicas of the scrolls under more normal lighting, to give a better idea of the appearance of the scrolls. One of these replicas contained the Ten Commandments from Deuteronomy (in Hebrew of course, so I had to take their word for it!)

The scrolls were displayed in a dark room in humidity-controlled cases. Dim lighting cycled on and off to avoid continuous exposure of the specimens to light. Larger lighted pictures were provided alongside with translation and explanatory text. An audio program was also provided with additional explanation for some displays.

The writing on the scrolls was in Hebrew and was very tiny. These were obviously not the large print editions of their Bibles! (rim shot) In some cases I could barely tell that there was writing on the scroll. In other cases I could see well enough that I wished I could read Hebrew.

Upon exiting from the Gallery of Scrolls, there were several more recent (a few hundred years old) Bibles, some in scroll form and others in codex form. Included in the display were examples in German, Latin, Greek, and old English.

At the end of the exhibit was (of course!) the gift shop where you could buy an assortment of momentos in a wide range of prices. I selected a hardcopy version of the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible. Of course I could have saved a little money at amazon.com, but hey–my copy came from a shelf only a few steps away from some real scrolls!

I came away from the exhibit feeling like I had encountered some important history.

For the well-read among us: Who was it who said the following:

There is nothing in which deduction is so necessary as in religion. It can be build up as an exact science by the reasoner.

Could it have been Thomas Campbell? Or his son Alexander? Or perhaps Alexander’s most famous student, J. W. McGarvey? Or Moses Lard? If you do not already know the answer, perhaps a few more quotes from the same source will trigger your memory:

One true inference invariably suggests others.

It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment.

Detection is, or ought to be, an exact science and should be treated in the same cold and unemotional manner.

Eliminate all other factors, and the one which remains must be the truth.

I never guess. It is a shocking habit — destructive to the logical faculty.

It was neither of the Campbells, nor McGarvey, nor any other Restoration Movement figure who gave us those saying, but rather Arthur Conan Doyle’s pipe-smoking detective who made all of the above statements.

These sayings are ripe with the philosophy of Francis Bacon (inductive reasoning). But Bacon’s fingerprints are also found on the Restoration Movement writings of the 19th century, particularly from the segment that evolved into the churches of Christ. Those leaders had great confidence in the abilities of man, by proper reasoning based on facts, to find our way to a better place as a church. There was a presumption that logical reasoning and inference, based on the scriptures alone, could lead us to unified faith and practice in accordance with the will of God. By observing the particular facts stated in scripture, and making careful inferences, we could discern the common principles governing those facts. And those principles would unite all followers of Jesus in fulfillment of his prayer in John 17. So it was thought.

Another Enlightenment voice that echoes in the RM writings comes from John Locke. Locke wrote a paper called “The Reasonableness of Christianity” in which he attempted to discern the fundamental requirements of Christian salvation, based on a purely logical study of the scriptures. Quoting from his introduction:

The little satisfaction and consistency that is to be found, in most of the systems of divinity I have met with, made me betake myself to the sole reading of the scriptures (to which they all appeal) for the understanding the Christian Religion. What from thence, by an attentive and unbiassed search, I have received, Reader, I here deliver to thee.

Locke was a strong advocate of religious toleration. Both Thomas and Alexander Campbell were greatly influenced by Locke. Thomas Campbell’s Declaration and Address is very much in harmony with with Locke’s The Reasonability of Christianity. Alexander Campbell published a series of excerpts from Locke’s “Letter on Toleration” in the Millenial Harbinger in 1844 (from The Crux of the Matter, Jack Reese et al, p 85).

McGarvey and Lard even surpassed the Campbells in their zeal for the use of inductive reasoning to derive truth from the scriptures. They were perhaps the primary voices leading to the binding of inferences from scripture as mandatory doctrine. Their reasoning was brilliant and eloquent. They were speaking the language of their day, the philosophy of their age, the Age of Reason.

Today, the Age of Reason is becoming long of tooth. The bright promise of reason has not been realized. We may know more, and we may be able to do some things we couldn’t do before, but is our world really a better world? Are people more happy? Are families more healthy? Are children more respectful?

The unfulfilled promise of Reason is seen in many areas of thought, but in none more than in religion. Religion, specifically biblical interpretation, has not proven to be anything like an exact science. Rather than bringing believers to unity, the black-and-white logical approach to every biblical subject has led to innumerable divisions among believers. That is not to say that logic has been the enemy of unity. Rather, I believe intellectual pride has led us to this point. We have been far too reluctant to admit our own shortcomings. We just can’t seem to say “I don’t know.”

We would do well to have an attitude more like that of Sherlock Holmes when, at the end of a rare failure in the case of “The Yellow Face”, he said:

Watson, if it should ever strike you that I am getting a little over-confident in my powers, or giving less pains to a case than it deserves, kindly whisper “Norbury” in my ear, and I shall be infinitely obliged to you.

We should be whispering “Norbury” in one anothers’ ears regularly (or maybe more appropriately, “Sand Creek“). I guess we need constant reminders of our own fallability. God knows we’ve failed often enough that we should remember.