Christian Unity

I need your help!

For our next series of articles I would like to discuss each of the fundamental practices of the Restoration Movement churches from the perspective of CENI. (things like baptism, the Lord’s supper, church governance, acts of worship, and anything else of that nature which we would expect to find in an “orthodox” Restoration Movement congregation). I want to discover the hermeneutic foundation for each practice. Did the Restoration Movement forefathers establish the practice based on an explicit command in scripture? Or was it recognized from a biblical example, or from a necessary inference? Any historical information about how the practice came to be recognized would be helpful.

At the same time, I want to examine each of these practices based on its nearness to the core of Christianity. Is it of crucial importance to salvation, or is it a peripheral matter, or something in-between? This will be a judgment matter, but I want to make an honest attempt to categorize the practices in this way. There may be a temptation to say every teaching is crucial to salvation. Or there may be an opposite temptation to claim that almost nothing is essential to salvation. Both extremes are mistaken IMO. The circle is not so narrow that only those with perfect understanding and practice will be saved. Nor is it so broad that everyone will be saved regardless of the severity of their errors.

I am interested to see which practices are crucial, and how well supported they are hermeneutically speaking. An understanding of this may be very helpful in advancing the cause of unity

To proceed, we need an inventory of these practices. And we need to collect the scriptural basis for each. I’d like get the biblical evidence as it would be argued by proponents of the practice.

This is where I need your help.

I’m looking for information in the following format:

1. Practice: Worship every Sunday
2. Biblical basis: Acts 20:7, 1 Cor 16:2
3. Historical basis: Justin Martyr, Apology 1, Chapter LXVII
4. Fifty words or less of explanation: The church in Troas met on the first day of the week to break bread, and Paul preached. The Corinthian church took up a collection on the first day of every week. And the historical account of Justin Martyr indicates that the practice of the church was to assemble on the first day of every week for worship. So we have two scriptural examples and historical confirmation of the practice.

Please use a separate comment for each practice. If there is more than one line of reasoning, you could repeat points 2, 3, and 4 for each line of reasoning.

Right now we are in brainstorming mode, just collecting an inventory of these practices. Then we’ll organize the data and attempt to analyze each in more detail. Hopefully this exercise will give us more insight regarding the way toward unity.

May God give us success in our effort!

Following in the footsteps of some of my friends in my bloglist, I have decided to try a new theme for the Christian Unity blog. This one is a lot easier on my feeble eyes. As Paul says,

Gal 6:11 See what large letters I use as I write to you with my own hand!

I hope you like it…

This weekend my wife and I will be travelling to Columbia, SC to attend the 2006 Southeast Festival of Faith conference hosted by the Columbia Church of Christ. This will be a gathering (primarily) of former ICOC congregations from around the southeast, and should be an interesting time. It will be the first such assembly in the southeast in several years. Since the last conference the various congregations have become autonomous after years of centralized control, and have been addressing various reforms that were sorely needed. There has been communication among the churches in the intervening years, and there is reason to believe that many of us are moving in similar directions. It will be interesting to see to what degree that is really the case.

On another note, an ElderLink forum will be hosted at the North Atlanta Church of Christ on March 25. ElderLink is a program out of Abilene Christian University designed to support elders in churches of Christ. I am very excited about the opportunity and am making plans to attend. Hopefully several other elders from the Atlanta family of former ICOC congregations will also attend.

Lately I’ve done a bit of commenting on threads on other blogs about doctrinal questions.

FIDE-O is having an interesting discussion of Calvinism. I’ve commented here and here. The consensus of the group is decidedly pro-Calvinist. I have not been able to bring myself to accept some parts of that body of doctrine.

Over at Regan’s Ravings, Regan is wrestling with the idea of baptism and with questions on the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

I am a bit conflicted about the idea of getting into controversial doctrinal discussion. The baptism question seems foundational to me. I take Acts 2:38-39 to be a universal and conditional promise. Baptism is one of the conditions. So in a quest for unity that discussion seems to be one in which I should engage.

However, the Calvinism debate is different. I don’t know of any scripture indicating that a person must understand and accept (or reject) that doctrine in order to be saved. Therefore I think there will be people on both sides of the question in heaven. So those who disagree with me are still my brothers, and I should not be quarrelling with them about disputable matters. And yet… Perhaps it would be possible to establish enough common ground between the two sides to eliminate suspicions and misrepresentations.

I’m not as confident about which category the question about the Holy Spirit belongs in.

For those of us who place a high priority on pursuing the unity Jesus prayed for in John 17, it is important that we handle these doctrinal discussions in a unifying way, if we engage in them at all. That is necessary even if the other participants do not handle the discussion in that manner.

Alan

From an article appearing today at livescience.com

Democrats and Republicans alike are adept at making decisions without letting the facts get in the way, a new study shows.

Scientists studied the brain activity of partisan Democrats and Republicans as they processed various facts that paint their favorite candidate in a bad light. They observed that emotions take control in these situations, rather than logic.

The brain imaging revealed a consistent pattern. Both Republicans and Democrats consistently denied obvious contradictions for their own candidate but detected contradictions in the opposing candidate. “The result is that partisan beliefs are calcified, and the person can learn very little from new data,” Westen said.

Of course this is not at all surprising, but it is an important phenomenon.

While this interesting in the political arena, it certainly relevant in the area of religion also. And it could be a huge obstacle to unity. We have an innate tendency to react emotionally when our beliefs are questioned. As a result we are very unlikely to logically consider an opposing viewpoint. The more emotional the issue, the less likely we will consider it logically. This makes it all the more important that we avoid polarizing in our conversations. We need to help one another keep our emotions calm. We need to be non-threatening.

Grace and patience are the best antidote I can think of for this tendency.

Far too many issues divide Christians today. Recently I’ve participated in discussions about a couple of these issues (instrumental music, and the role of women in the church). Those discussions have been enlightening.

On these two issues I find myself on opposite sides. I do not have a conscientious objection to worshipping with instrumental music, putting me on the permissive side of that debate. However, I do have a conscience issue with women speaking publicly in a worship service, putting me on the restrictive side of the question. Participating in these two discussions has shown me what it feels like for people on both sides of a disputed question.

I won’t get into the specifics of my beliefs on these topics here. You can read my post commenting on instrumental music here, and the thread where I posted on the role of women here.

While I do not believe it is wrong to use instrumental music in worship, I respect those who believe it is wrong. Their belief is derived from scripture honestly, based on a certain hermeneutic, and is well though-out. There are many who hold that belief sincerely and with deep conviction, despite the extreme unpopularity of the belief. Their conviction and integrity is commendable. I know how it feels to hold such a conviction because I hold a similarly unpopular conviction on the subject of the women’s role.

Many who hold the permissive view on one of these subjects cannot imagine how an honest person could hold the opposing view. So they conclude that the other person must be dishonest, or illogical, or biased. The motives of the conservative person are often called into question. The discussion descends into ad hominum arguments. That is not constructive, and is not “walking in love” (Rom 14:13-15).

If there is any hope of restoring unity to the Lord’s church, we must learn to accept one another without passing judgment on one another on disputable matters.

It apparently is possible to condemn yourself by approving something God does not approve:

Rom 14:22-23 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.

I do not know whether approving instrumental music or approving women preaching would fit into the category of a person condemning himself by what he approves. But it is quite clear that a person who believes one of these to be wrong, yet practices it anyway, is risking condemnation. Therefore we should be quite careful to respect the convictions of those who believe such things to be wrong. They have no choice but to follow their consciences.

For the sake of the unity Jesus prayed for in John 17, let’s resolve not to put a stumbling block in our brother’s way.

Some things are easy, and others are hard.

Demonstrating the biblical call to unity is easy. A doctorate in theology is not required. Finding fault with the current state of disunity among professing Christians is also easy…as is the task of pointing out where Christians in the past have given birth to controversies that have led to long-standing divisions.

It is a good thing that those are easy tasks. They are necessary first steps toward the really hard and really important steps that follow. If the first steps were the hardest, fewer people would even begin the work. But many who enthusiastically take on the early tasks come to a standstill when it comes time to do something about it, something that makes a difference.

Having commented on the thirteen propositions of Thomas Campbell’s Declaration and Address, it is now time to shift from theory to practicals. And now it gets really hard.

Today this was posted on one of my earliest articles on this blog:

Thanks for working on your blog. It is encouraging to see brothers who want the broadest unity without losing core theology or salvation doctrine.

I would be curious to learn more of your thoughts and ideas on developing unity, congregational mergers and practicals for building bridges with those who share the same core beliefs.

I want to bring these topics onto the front page of the blog. I absolutely don’t have all the answers to these questions. I have some thoughts, mainly unproven thoughts. I am convinced that it must start with communication built on humility and mutual respect. How far that can take us, and how quickly we can get there, I do not know.

I believe everyone has something to contribute. If your gift is in the practicals, this is where that gift is needed! Where do you think we should go from here?

I have just created a Christian Unity Google group to serve as a mailing list for this blog. There is also a link for this purpose at the bottom of the page. Sign up for the group if you want to receive email notification when a new article is posted on the blog. Please sign up!

You can also use the atom feed to receive RSS-style notifications. If you are using Firefox, you should see a “live bookmark” icon on the right side of the address bar. Click that icon to create a live bookmark which will show you the latest additions to the site.

Thanks!

I suspect that people blog for different reasons. Even blogs related to Christianity may have different motivations and goals. Some may wish to persuade people to their way of thinking. Others may just want to create a community for discussion related to any aspect of Christianity. My purpose in creating this blog is more specific than that. I am searching for people with whom I should be having fellowship, but historically have not.

I was adopted as God’s son when I believed in Jesus (that he is the Son of God, was crucified to pay the penalty for my sins, and was raised again on the third day), repented of my sins, and was baptized for forgiveness of my sins (Acts 2:38-39). Anyone else who has done the same is my brother or my sister in Christ. Though our views may differ on many other subjects, by sharing those things in common we are children of God, co-heirs with Christ, and members of God’s household together. And therefore we should accept one another without reservation. Those are my core convictions.

It is not my purpose to debate my core convictions, or yours. But if your core convictions are compatible with mine, I want to talk. I especially want to talk if you are in the Atlanta area.

At this time I will pause from posting on this blog and wait for comments or emails from people interested in dialog on this basis. If you are interested you can post on this blog, or simply email me at:

blogger[at]rouses[dot]net

replacing [at] with @ and [dot] with a period.

I am looking forward to hearing from you!

Unity requires consensus on a set of premises or postulates. These form the foundation on which the unity is built. For our quest for Christian unity, I propose that we should begin from the following premises:

1) God is the creator of the universe, and the ruler of all he created.

2) The Bible is his word.

These form a sufficient basis for beginning our discussion. They provide an authority and a standard which will guide our discussions as we work toward unity.

At this point in the quest we should be careful not to dive too deeply into minutiae on these postulates. There are some raging debates in certain details that could derail our efforts to reach consensus on weightier matters. It seems hopeless to me to build Christian unity without agreement on those basic points, so I wish to begin the dialog with people who accept these postulates at face value.

Proceeding on that foundation, we can discuss the basic Christian doctrines. The scriptures will serve as a guide and a standard as we seek to answer important unity-related questions:

1) What doctrines require absolute agreement in order to have fellowship?
2) In what areas can we accept honest disagreements / misunderstandings within the fellowship?
3) How should we handle areas of honest disagreement in the fellowship?
4) What are the areas of common ground which can anchor our unity?
5) What are the spiritual character traits that need to be built in order to sustain unity?

There is a lot to consider as we move forward. As always, comments are welcome.