The New Testament speaks of the need for church unity, but; how has this been translated into action of the church. As I have observed, unity today means following leadership and conforming unquestioningly to the established traditions and habits of the establishment. The establishment does not have to be the pastor it can also be deacons or other factions within the church that have the largest or at least the loudest say. Those who do raise questions or concerns are treated as if they are spiritually lesser, unchristian, miss guided, and at times even demonized. To appreciate this type of response, one must also understand that the issues typically have little if anything to do with doctrine. To question the continuation or change to a ministry, even a failed ministry, can evoke the wrath of the establishment, which always sees itself as being right and the most spiritual. Other things such as the spending of money, order of worship, the type of worship can also create factions bent on having their way. None of these having anything to do with doctrine and all should be openly and honestly discussed without creating a break in the fellowship.
There are some problems with this type of blind and mindless unity. One, it forces the masses to quit thinking and applying Scripture to their daily lives because you now have "church rules", which lose their relevancy once you leave church. Blindly following prevents them from seeing the differences between traditions, cultural influences, and real doctrinal issues. The second problem of this form of unity is that it creates an unquestionable ecclesiastical order. This can lead to corruption once leadership is incapable of making mistakes even if those mistakes are immoral and/or illegal.
Some of the root cause of this problem may be that the leadership over emphasizes or even miss use Scripture concerning unity such as, Romans 16:17-18. While the New Testament writers were concerned about unity of the church, as Wayne Grudem points out in is his Systematic Theology, “there are no direct New Testament commands to separate from Christians”. The Apostles had disagreements amongst themselves and still had unity in the mission and cause for Christ. It is absurd to believe that everyone must agree on everything to have unity within the church.
Another potential cause to the problem is the modern version of the “Pharisees syndrome”, more concerned about legal or doctrinal issues than the souls of men. This leads to the looking down on people as some how lesser than themselves. The affect is not limited to how they treat follow Christians at various maturity levels but society as a whole. Even to the audacity to tell visitors that they are not fit to come to church. This changes the song “Just as I am” to “Only as we want you”, which may be the biggest sin of the modern church since it could lead to the lose of souls and goes against Christ's commandment to reach ALL men.
So, what is the solution? First, pastors, clergy, priest, and lay leaders they must define the purpose of the church so that the member clearly understand its role in the Kingdom work. This means going beyond the standard theologically filled babble or saying something like “we are reaching the world for Christ”. This is a bit vague for the person sitting in the pew and it must be a bit more relevant and closer to home. Unity of purpose can be achieved through the use of a mission statement for the church or basically stating what ministries the church is going to engage in. This will provide a gage that can be used to evaluate the spending of money, starting and stopping of ministries, and many other activities. It will also start providing clear places for the membership to insert themselves into and make the Christian life an active life with a Kingdom focus (surly it is more than going on Sunday).
Another area is to understand change. I have been in deacon's meeting where someone wants to do something new and the first thing stated is “we are not changing any doctrine”. I have always wanted to ask if they knew the doctrine and could really identify a change if a statement like that is required. It needs to be understood that the church is in a constant state of change. If not, it is dieing. Change here is the cultural and technological change that goes on in the world as well as the transition to the next generation. We must understand that the culture will enter the church. Two key examples here are music and dress. Surly, we can see that we do not dress like they did two or three hundred years ago nor is the music the same. So, during the last two thousand years which dress is proper or which music is correct? How someone answers will depend on their age, back ground, social and economic status.
One last thought. We should not see disagreement as necessarily bad. Honest and open discussion, which also requires listening, allows everyone to have a voice in the direction that church takes in its ministry work. This satisfies a need that people have to be heard, to contribute, and to be needed. It also helps ensure that the best decision in made. The church is full of ideas, back grounds and insights it would be a shame to not hear from them. Once a direction has been decided, then the church should rally around the task or mission and move forward.
1 comment:
In the Baptist Church I grew up in, there was small sub-factions that each held different "takes" on what it meant to be Baptist. These factions were from the left-winged Baptists (inasmuch as a Baptist could be and still be considered a Baptist) to the extreme right-winged baptist collective which were the life-longers and nuvo-baptiste' - even though it was the "baptiste'" that counted.
All of my life while listening tothe sermons, attending the prayer meetings, the special events, the dinners, the business meetings, the church presentations, I learned a few things along the way.
All infrastrutures inevitably implode from within. This is a law of nature. And ever 39 years of being alive, and 25 of those searching to find a relationship with God that I can understand, I now am certain that I walk a thin line.
I work everyday giving unto Caesars what is indeed his, but what greater good? None really. I'm an engineer for a finance company. But there are those among us lowly humans who DO get it and they truly serve God, as in the biblical sense. And those are Buddhist Monks, Hindu Preists, and the Jesuits. From the minute they awaken till the time they go to bed, all they do in service to him. And when it was when I had gotten to a point in my life where I had personally known one of each of these people, I then realized my relationship with God was a false one because it was a social function, it needed the building, it needed the committees to be on, it needed to decide who was going to read scripture and devotionals on sunday, it needed to find sunday school teachers. My relationship was more about "bringing a covered dish" than it was clothing my neighbor when he was sick, lifting him up when he we was down. The Jesuit, the Sikh, and the monk got it, they loved it and the lived it every second of their life. They didn't live a doulble life where it was career first, family second, and then God on sundays. And that it something that will plague me forever.
I get up and go to work. I do not go to church on sunday, in the same manner that I do not go to a Temple on Saturday, or a Mosque on Saturday. I am neither Baptist, nor Chatholic, Jew or Gentile. But I do have a relationship with God. I long to make it closer. But we have careers that make it difficult.
No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Mammon being the career, the auditing department, the sunday school committee, the deacon committee, etc, etc, etc,.
The jesuit, the monk, and the sikh do not suffer from this err in judgement. Their service the great architect is pure and true, without confusion at it's base. I am cursed to long my entire life hoping that my interpretation is correct, that it is ok to build career, belongings, income level, 401k's rather than devote my life to feeding the poor, educating the illiterate, giving medicine to the ill. Only then I would lay my head down each night with a heart and conscience of purity.
For now - I cannot.
Allen Van Hoosier
Post a Comment