Is There Room At The Table?
February 22nd, 2007 | by Scott |Much has been said and discussed lately about the identity crisis that is taking place within my little section of Christianity, Churches of Christ.
In the light of the issues within our churches and my own shifting orthopraxy I often wonder how big the table of our fellowship might be. As I study, prepare sermons and classes, and write this blog I wonder how broad and diverse our opinions, views and interpretations can be. And I often wrestle if whether or not I can truly say what is on my mind and heart without repercussions. And whether or not my views and interpretations will continue to remain compatible as we move into the future.
But broader than just me is how we will be able to continue to forge unity in the midst of so many perspectives and positions:
–Is there room at the table for the pacifist who believes that all war is sinful with the military veteran who has served his country proudly?
–Is there room at the table for the one who believes that global warming is junk science with the environmentalist who believes that care of the earth is true Christian stewardship?
–Is there room at the table for the one who believes that hell is real but temporary with the one who holds a more punitive view of God’s judgment?
–Is there room at the table for the pro-life to sit with the pro-choice?
–Is there room at the table for the one who supports civil unions with the one who tolerance is akin to endorsement?
–Is there room at the table for the one who has a more “liberal” interpretation of scripture in regards to creation and evolution with the one who holds unswervingly to intelligent design?
–Is there room at the table for the trinitarian with the non-trinitarian?
These are just some of the questions that go through my mind as I consider the future of our churches. These questions seem a lot more intense, personal and potentially volatile than whether or not we use a harmonica.
What other table questions do you see emerging?
20 Responses to “Is There Room At The Table?”
By Jason Bybee on Feb 22, 2007 | Reply
Scott,
This is exactly where I am, too. I wonder if we’ll ever get past our own “version” of Christianity to allow any kind of diversity at the table. I must confess I’m usually more pessimistic than optimistic about all of that. Of your list of issues, the one I seem to wrestle with most frequently is the one about differing interpretations. How many souls will never know Christ because we demand a homogenous orthodoxy? When will 30 years of stagnation finally awaken us to the world we find ourselves in? I could go on, but I’ll get too depressed…
I guess my larger question is how do we reconcile our own attitudes and interpretations with a Lord who shared table with all manner of public sinners? Would we even allow Christ a seat at our table?
By Jeff on Feb 22, 2007 | Reply
The only potential problem I see there is with the non-trinitarian. It depends on what is meant by that. If someone does not believe that Jesus is both human and divine, there can be no fellowship.
At least that’s what the apostle John wrote…
By Scott on Feb 22, 2007 | Reply
Jason, I share your pessimism. At least within the mainstream. And I’m afraid far too many of us have a very small table.
Jeff, I think the non-trinitarian thing is interesting and what prompted me to include that is the current Ed Young/TD Jakes story-line.
By Jim MacKenzie on Feb 22, 2007 | Reply
There has to be room around the table of fellowship in the name of Jesus Christ because we have to remember that he invited us there too, us with nothing to offer but our sinfulness…
By Larry on Feb 22, 2007 | Reply
Christian groups believing they alone have been blessed with the ability to perfectly interpret the scriptures will always find plenty of elbow room around their table.
Judging other believers as sinners unless they lockstep to our particular belief system guarantees a small fellowship.
By Dan on Feb 23, 2007 | Reply
“Judging other believers as sinners unless they lockstep to our particular belief system guarantees a small fellowship.”
Hasn’t that always been the point for the CoC? Didn’t we always trot out Matthew 7:14 when “dissent” arose? We always preached love, but only as long as doctrine came first. Not having been to a CoC in I don’t know how long, it’s hard for me to even fathom Scott’s list items as opposites, since I see all of them every Sunday.
By JTB on Feb 23, 2007 | Reply
More questions to add to the list:
–Is there room for a believer in tongues, healing, and other manifestations of the Holy Spirit with the one who believes the HS speaks through the Bible and that the time of miracles is past?
–is there room at the table for someone with a degree in theology with the one who believes such education is at best irrelevant and at worst harmful to faith?
On trinitarian question & CofC: I have noticed since attending church with Brent that the few hymns I do recognize inevitably end with an unfamiliar verse that distinctly trinitarian, such as “Holy, holy, holy.” Our version ends with “God over all, and blessed eternally” while the Episcopal church sings, “God in three persons, blessed Trinity.” The word Trinity is pretty much absent from our worship life, and I suspect as a result, from our doctrine as well. We will certainly claim the full humanity and divinity of Jesus Christ; but that leaves us with what is in effect a binitarian worship and practice, and no real discussion of how God the Father and Christ the Son are related. Is this a problem? I don’t know–I am still unsure whether I am trinitarian, or if I adhere to one of the classic trinitarian heresies…a student once asked me in class, “so, what exactly is wrong with modalism?” and I found myself hard-pressed to answer…
By scott on Feb 23, 2007 | Reply
And hence why we often have a small fellowship.
Dan, I imagine that I see all these people each Sunday as well. Problem is those who might hold a more “liberal” view aren’t emboldened to share that.
I wrestle with this each Sunday. My view of hell, for example, is outside of COC orthodoxy. How I handle those passages with integrity while remaining somewhat non-provocative is a challenge.
By scott on Feb 23, 2007 | Reply
JTB, great questions. The advanced theology degree is interesting to me. I regularly teach things that are more “academic.” I’ve been talking a lot about canonicity in my classes lately. Most find the study informative and helpful. Then there are some who think any of these questions are a waste of time.
By Jeff_R on Feb 25, 2007 | Reply
I like that you used the word “emerging”. Heh, heh.
By joe on Feb 25, 2007 | Reply
Is it a bad thing that I don’t give a shit? Seriously. This “identity crisis” discussion is so very tired. It desperately wants to be put to bed for a very long night’s sleep.
Because of who my sister was (she was the only paid female preacher in the CofC for some time before running like hell for another denomination) and because of some of the things I blog about I often get e-mails from “concerned brothers” who want to set me straight. Back in the day, I took the time to respond to those queries. Not anymore. I just don’t care.
By Scott on Feb 25, 2007 | Reply
Jeff, it wasn’t intentional. Seriously.
Joe, it has been around for a while, hasn’t it? I can’t imagine the valley that church planting in the midst of personal pain must be. Hang in there and keep the faith.
By len on Feb 25, 2007 | Reply
Some have never had the “identity crisis” discussion before so I think it is still necessary. God works at different speeds in different lives. His table is so extremely varied that, in a sense, we will always be sharing communion and fellowship with someone diametrically opposite of ourselves. Since we are all at different places in the working out of the faith, we must be patient and helpful to those who are somewhere other than us. Personally, I think Bush-bashing is getting rather tired, but there are many who still need to vent. They are at a different place than me and I need to be there to help them in their discovery.
By the way, Scott, by our churches do you mean COC or the universal church?
By Scott on Feb 25, 2007 | Reply
Len, I’m talking about both. My circle of fellowship is quite a bit broader than that of the restoration movement. However, that is the context in which I am most familiar.
By Colleen on Feb 25, 2007 | Reply
Hi Scott, I read your post and it really sparked some more thought on my part about something that I think is somewhat related, but on a broader scale. I hope you can make sense of it. It’s true in so many areas of my life…. that sometimes embracing the contradiction is necessary, and in my mind, embracing it is not the same as succumbing to it. It brings about an interesting tension…it forces you to make choices, even if sometimes only intellectually. I guess, admitting to the contradiction in my own heart/life and recognizing it’s power to point out my own frailties and desire for God to make me whole is a thought I hold very tightly too. I need it in my life, and I need to make allowances for it in the lives of others and in the world. If I only entertain ideas, art, music, spirituality or politics that reflect my specific viewpoint, or only associate with people who seem like me, I really limit my own growth as a person and may never be challenged to be open to change. Christianity is full of contradictions when you think about it. The birth of Christ in a stable without honor, the humility of the crucifixion, the woman at the well…there’s power in the contradiction for me….keeping my feet firmly planted here in the world where I live and embracing it, but keeping my soul, heart focused on the trancendent. It’s a contradiction in terms, but it makes my faith deeper and more tangible, and it continually humbles me and reassures me that His love is teaching me how to kneel.
And, by the way, I don’t think any question could be a waste of time…certainly not one that provokes or gives pause for thought.
By Scott on Feb 26, 2007 | Reply
Absolutely, Colleen. Great points.
By Jeff_R on Feb 26, 2007 | Reply
BTW, Scott, I used your list of questions (anonomously) in my class on Revolution yesterday. I’ve been building a case over several weeks that the church is constantly changing throughout it’s entire history and that if we were to drop a person from a 1950s mainstream CoC church into a mainstream church today, they’d be shocked by much of what we now consider noncontroversial and commonplace. I then challenged our class to think about what the church might look like 25 or 50 years from now, considering how we’ve shifted over time due to cultural pressures. The responses were intriguing. And no one even balked at your questions - which I thought was significant, too!
By Scott on Feb 26, 2007 | Reply
That’s encouraging. It’s heartening to think that maybe we are realizing that God’s redemptive story did not end in 95 AD (or whenever we think that last book was written) but is still being penned today. And how much of our moral code is cultural is a question that must be grappled with.
By Jeff_R on Feb 26, 2007 | Reply
Or how much of our moral code is biological!
By JackieW on Mar 14, 2007 | Reply
Scott,
Have been reading these discussions and finding them fascinating. Wanted to touch on a few comments and questions here.
First, though raised CoC, I can leave a lot of room for “disputable matters.” I don’t/won’t budge on a few things, like Christ is fully human AND the son of God and our Savior, who was crucified for our sins and rose on the third day. I also hold that we must be baptised for remission of our sins, since we are in no way “good enough” to get to heaven without the ticket Jesus bought for us with his life’s blood. But most other issues are disputable. I find a lot of things that people fight over are disputable.
I figure that God knows who his children are, and I will just do my best to love everyone, and learn from my fellow man their views on life and God, while sharing mine. Sometimes they aid me to grow, and sometimes I aid them.
I am, however, one who believes in the trinity. Look at Jesus’ baptism. He had never heard his father’s voice… Mat 3:16-17
As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. (17) And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”
There one can plainly see all three members of the Trinity. But if another believer doesn’t buy the trinity, that’s okay with me. If they are following the same road to heaven that I am, who am I to tell them they aren’t saved?? I’m not the Judge of the world, but I’ve SEEN the judge’s job, and I DON’T WANT IT!!!
Actually, to tell you the truth, come Judgment Day, I don’t want Justice, I want MERCY… lots and lots of mercy!!
Anyway, back to your list, Scott… I think there should be room at the CoC table for anyone who believes that Jesus Christ is the crucified but raised Son of God and savior. We have many different political believes at Northside, and we all still love each other. So I don’t see why we can’t all have differing opinions on disputable matters and all still love each other.
As for spiritual gifts… I believe they still exist. Not for everyone, and I don’t think God lets them run out of control. He is a god of order, not chaos. Why do I believe in spiritual gifts? Two reasons, really. 1) Members of my family have a psychic connection to each other, we can tell when another member needs us. Also, I have premonitions when there is something coming that I am supposed to do something about. When these warnings come I have no doubt that some people think I am psychotic, but that’s okay with me. I know that I get warnings for a reason, and I learned early on to listen. If my premonitions didn’t bat a thousand they would be MUCH easier to ignore.
As for Hell… it is not a place I intend to go. The lake of fire, etc. I do know that many seem to confuse Hell and Hades. When the subject comes up in my Sunday morning class, I tell my students that as near as I can tell, Hades is a sort of waiting room made up of two sides: Paradise and Torment. I can remember my father saying that in Torment they only lit a small match under while in Hell you got the whole lake of fire. Anyway, between the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus and what Jesus told the repenting criminal on the cross, Paradise and Torment do exist, and Hell awaits those who are eternally lost.
I don’t know that my view of Hell is quite the same as most folks’ either. I don’t know if the fire and brimstone is real or not. I DO know that there is outer darkness, weeping and gnashing of teeth. So, since those in Hell are cut off from everything Heaven offers (love, trust, light, hope, God, etc.) Hell must have everything else. Darkness, hate, despair, loneliness, etc. That all sounds like a list of the best reasons to avoid Hell that I have ever heard!!