I've been thinking about unity and appreciate your fuel for that fire, Lloyd.
So, are there non-negotiables in the Church of God - whether in doctrine or practice? I speak not of the 5 general non-negotiables of which we have heard much over the last decade from our executive director (of which, not coincidentally, includes unity). Although these are important, I'm not sure that they are detailed enough at the summary level. For example, the top of those 5 is "Jesus". He is the subject, after all. But isn't our Christology more than His Name? For example, the Bible declares Jesus to be THE Son of God. If someone (or a church) were to highly esteem Jesus, agreeing that He should rightly be at the top of our non-negotiables as an example to follow, but struggle to declare/believe that He is actually THE Son of God, wouldn't that be what some would call, a "show-stopper?"
Or, in the practice of baptism, I understand that the sole practice for baptism in the Church of God is "believer's baptism" rather than infant baptism. As an ordinance recognized in Leadership Focus, would we practice unity with a Church of God congregation that chose to practice infant baptism? Would unity extend to a different approach than a key ordinance like baptism?
There are two questions with which I wrestle in this regard. One, what truly are our non-negotiables? What are the key distinctives of the Church of God in total? Stepping deeper one level, what do we believe about the aforementioned top 5? Perhaps our history regarding creeds (or statements of faith) prevents us somehow from asking this question. However, at what point do the distinctives change from a grey line to one with far more contrast? Without some conversation about such beliefs and distinctives, we will not be prepared for the next question.
Two, what does unity mean in the 21st century? Ecumenically, there are churches in my community with which our church has served. We can be in unity to some degree for purposes of service in the community - even worshiping together. Yet, there are key doctrines and practices in which we are not in agreement (women in leadership or infant baptism, for example). Are there different forms of unity exercised in different ways and at different times? Do the practices of unity change depending on the distinctives that are challenged - whether in the Church of God or outside the Church of God?
Or, does the practice of unity lean into the approach to our differences rather than solely upon the maintaining the boundaries we define? In other words, we may not agree - perhaps vehemently so - yet, seeking unity, we look for places of agreement and choose instead to love one another (yet one more non-negotiable), refusing to engage in such "intemperate" behavior as you have illustrated with the stories of Brother Warner.
Thinking this through, we would be helped by answering those two questions, I believe. Too many times the boundaries lack clarity as the world teaches us to focus on our differences rather than our points of agreement.
Greg, many good questions here. I think you are identifying the endless conundrum we face if and when we try to nail down the boundaries too tight. I will be coming back to this in another article soon, but thanks for raising some excellent thoughts here.
Thank you, Greg for your thoughtful response to Lloyd's article. The enemy of unity is judgment. We all know John 3:16. It seems we little attention to to John 3:17. Jesus said let the weeds and wheat grow together lest you root up wheat while you are pulling weeds. The Lord of the harvest will deal with it then.
In our pilgrimage with Christ we are always growing. At least that is the plan. Since we are always growing, we are never going to be at the same place at the same time. I don't know about you, but I have completely reversed myself on some issues. I believe the road to unity is to withhold judgment, trust each other, and have faith in the Holy Spirit. There are major issues like abortion, LGBTQ, deep political devides, eternal security, sacraments, and ordinances and others. if we continue to divide over these issues, Jesus prayer that we will have unity will never be successfully entered at least in this life.
Thank you for writing this series, Lloyd. I hope it prompts a thoughtful and mutually respectful dialogue.
The history of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) parallels that of the Church of God in many ways. Growing out of the Cane Ridge Revival of 1801, the Disciples Church is also dedicated to promoting Christian unity. It is also called a movement rather than a denomination. Several sects have split off from it (the independent Christian Church, the Church of Christ, etc.), but far fewer than the Church of God.
The biggest difference is the Disciples' openness to diversity. Even their founding ministers (Barton Stone and Andrew Campbell) did not agree on several doctrines, including the doctrine of the Trinity, but they believed the cause of Christian unity was so important that they agreed to work together despite their differences.
This begs the question: Do Church of God people have such a passion for Christian unity that they will work together despite their differences?
For 2000 years, the church has pride to create unity out of orthodoxy. I'm not saying that orthodox is unimportant but whenever it raises its head there is another division. We managed to ride into over 40,000 sects and denominations. At this point, I am willing to accept any brother or sister who proclaims the Lordship of Christ whether I agree with them on important doctoral and theological issues.
Jesus did not say that everyone would know we are his disciples because we all agree with each other. No, the standard is love.
I have come to the conclusion that's whatever there are nonnegotiables there is another division.
As I understand the scriptures, Chris himself will be the judge. He also said let the wheat and the weeds grow together. When we pull weeds, we pull wheat. He said the Lord of the harvest will sort it out in the end. That's not me nor do I believe it one of you or even the aggregate of us
Richard, you have lifted up a most insightful parable for this discussion. I hope you'll allow me the liberty of going down a rabbit trail (albeit one that has some nourishing fruit along the way.
One of the Warner Press artists posted a painting of Jesus laughing with a bunch of kids on Facebook yesterday. It was so free, exultant, and joyful that others began asking who the artist was. Curious myself, I found it on the LDS (Latter-Day Saints) publishing website, along with samples and bios of several artists they use. There were many more images of Jesus laughing with children, dancing with them, cuddling them, etc.
I would not encourage anyone to embrace LDS doctrine, but they've captured the spirit of Jesus. The first line of advertising copy on the LDS site for these art prints says, "A picture of Christ in every child's room." I would go along with that.
Franklin Miller had the original of that painting if I have the right painting in mind.
I always loved that painting.
I've worked ecumenically with a number of LDS people. I don't hold with their theology or they mine but we were able to work together to help feed the hungry and provide shelter for the homeless.
A humorous note. I was always riding my friend who was president of the Indianapolis stake about
He said Richard, I'll tell you what really happens. We find the most spiritually nature and wisest person in the congregation. Then we make er husband the bishop.
I've been thinking about unity and appreciate your fuel for that fire, Lloyd.
So, are there non-negotiables in the Church of God - whether in doctrine or practice? I speak not of the 5 general non-negotiables of which we have heard much over the last decade from our executive director (of which, not coincidentally, includes unity). Although these are important, I'm not sure that they are detailed enough at the summary level. For example, the top of those 5 is "Jesus". He is the subject, after all. But isn't our Christology more than His Name? For example, the Bible declares Jesus to be THE Son of God. If someone (or a church) were to highly esteem Jesus, agreeing that He should rightly be at the top of our non-negotiables as an example to follow, but struggle to declare/believe that He is actually THE Son of God, wouldn't that be what some would call, a "show-stopper?"
Or, in the practice of baptism, I understand that the sole practice for baptism in the Church of God is "believer's baptism" rather than infant baptism. As an ordinance recognized in Leadership Focus, would we practice unity with a Church of God congregation that chose to practice infant baptism? Would unity extend to a different approach than a key ordinance like baptism?
There are two questions with which I wrestle in this regard. One, what truly are our non-negotiables? What are the key distinctives of the Church of God in total? Stepping deeper one level, what do we believe about the aforementioned top 5? Perhaps our history regarding creeds (or statements of faith) prevents us somehow from asking this question. However, at what point do the distinctives change from a grey line to one with far more contrast? Without some conversation about such beliefs and distinctives, we will not be prepared for the next question.
Two, what does unity mean in the 21st century? Ecumenically, there are churches in my community with which our church has served. We can be in unity to some degree for purposes of service in the community - even worshiping together. Yet, there are key doctrines and practices in which we are not in agreement (women in leadership or infant baptism, for example). Are there different forms of unity exercised in different ways and at different times? Do the practices of unity change depending on the distinctives that are challenged - whether in the Church of God or outside the Church of God?
Or, does the practice of unity lean into the approach to our differences rather than solely upon the maintaining the boundaries we define? In other words, we may not agree - perhaps vehemently so - yet, seeking unity, we look for places of agreement and choose instead to love one another (yet one more non-negotiable), refusing to engage in such "intemperate" behavior as you have illustrated with the stories of Brother Warner.
Thinking this through, we would be helped by answering those two questions, I believe. Too many times the boundaries lack clarity as the world teaches us to focus on our differences rather than our points of agreement.
Greg, many good questions here. I think you are identifying the endless conundrum we face if and when we try to nail down the boundaries too tight. I will be coming back to this in another article soon, but thanks for raising some excellent thoughts here.
Thank you, Greg for your thoughtful response to Lloyd's article. The enemy of unity is judgment. We all know John 3:16. It seems we little attention to to John 3:17. Jesus said let the weeds and wheat grow together lest you root up wheat while you are pulling weeds. The Lord of the harvest will deal with it then.
In our pilgrimage with Christ we are always growing. At least that is the plan. Since we are always growing, we are never going to be at the same place at the same time. I don't know about you, but I have completely reversed myself on some issues. I believe the road to unity is to withhold judgment, trust each other, and have faith in the Holy Spirit. There are major issues like abortion, LGBTQ, deep political devides, eternal security, sacraments, and ordinances and others. if we continue to divide over these issues, Jesus prayer that we will have unity will never be successfully entered at least in this life.
Thank you for writing this series, Lloyd. I hope it prompts a thoughtful and mutually respectful dialogue.
The history of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) parallels that of the Church of God in many ways. Growing out of the Cane Ridge Revival of 1801, the Disciples Church is also dedicated to promoting Christian unity. It is also called a movement rather than a denomination. Several sects have split off from it (the independent Christian Church, the Church of Christ, etc.), but far fewer than the Church of God.
The biggest difference is the Disciples' openness to diversity. Even their founding ministers (Barton Stone and Andrew Campbell) did not agree on several doctrines, including the doctrine of the Trinity, but they believed the cause of Christian unity was so important that they agreed to work together despite their differences.
This begs the question: Do Church of God people have such a passion for Christian unity that they will work together despite their differences?
Yes, excellent question, and one I will come back to!
For 2000 years, the church has pride to create unity out of orthodoxy. I'm not saying that orthodox is unimportant but whenever it raises its head there is another division. We managed to ride into over 40,000 sects and denominations. At this point, I am willing to accept any brother or sister who proclaims the Lordship of Christ whether I agree with them on important doctoral and theological issues.
Jesus did not say that everyone would know we are his disciples because we all agree with each other. No, the standard is love.
I have come to the conclusion that's whatever there are nonnegotiables there is another division.
As I understand the scriptures, Chris himself will be the judge. He also said let the wheat and the weeds grow together. When we pull weeds, we pull wheat. He said the Lord of the harvest will sort it out in the end. That's not me nor do I believe it one of you or even the aggregate of us
Richard, you have lifted up a most insightful parable for this discussion. I hope you'll allow me the liberty of going down a rabbit trail (albeit one that has some nourishing fruit along the way.
One of the Warner Press artists posted a painting of Jesus laughing with a bunch of kids on Facebook yesterday. It was so free, exultant, and joyful that others began asking who the artist was. Curious myself, I found it on the LDS (Latter-Day Saints) publishing website, along with samples and bios of several artists they use. There were many more images of Jesus laughing with children, dancing with them, cuddling them, etc.
I would not encourage anyone to embrace LDS doctrine, but they've captured the spirit of Jesus. The first line of advertising copy on the LDS site for these art prints says, "A picture of Christ in every child's room." I would go along with that.
Franklin Miller had the original of that painting if I have the right painting in mind.
I always loved that painting.
I've worked ecumenically with a number of LDS people. I don't hold with their theology or they mine but we were able to work together to help feed the hungry and provide shelter for the homeless.
A humorous note. I was always riding my friend who was president of the Indianapolis stake about
Their refusal to have women bishops (pastors).
He said Richard, I'll tell you what really happens. We find the most spiritually nature and wisest person in the congregation. Then we make er husband the bishop.