Preliminary Note: This post is written to provide a new home to the discussion of the hypothetical question. The original post will archive soon and we are all getting tired of scrolling way down the screen to check it.
I want to clarify my agenda. It is not my goal to stimulate any shift in our stance toward any particular doctrine issue. I built the question around instrumental music solely to stimulate lively discussion. Out of that discussion, more relevant issues have surfaced. It is my goal to stimulate a cultural change. A change in our demeanor and attitude toward things outside the realm of our brotherhood. I mean no disrespect to our current or past state. I feel indebted to those before me, upon whose shoulders I stand. I simply want to stimulate a continued march closer to the heart of God. In that sense, I see this goal as a continuation of the goal of those before me. When one speaks of change, a negative message is simultaneously sent. The underlying idea is that the current state of things is unsatisfactory (I thank Tom Kelley for opening my eyes to that dynamic). I want to be aggressive in pursuing the full potential in God's grace, without suggesting that something is currently wrong and in need of change. There is a need for change-it begins with my heart.
We have engaged a good discussion about the church. We all recognize that there is but one church. We differ in our understanding of the exact parameters of that church. I believe there are many practical applications of this discussion. I'll mention one, isolationism. We tend, as a body, to isolate ourselves from all other religious bodies. We act suspicious of other groups. Our concern about their doctrinal purity leads us to avoid cooperation, even in shared goals. This attitude generally precludes our involvement in community-wide service projects, ministerial associations; basically, anything we cannot do totally on our own. We pay a heavy price for our isolationism. Is it necessary to maintain such impermeable boundaries?
I haven't developed this concern as clearly as I would have liked. But after all, this is not an essay, it's a conversation. I,ll pick it up in the comments.
Sunday, November 13, 2005
Hypothetical Question - cont.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
This morning I re-read the post and began to feel uncomfortable. The emphasis on what I'm thinking and moving toward the heart of God sounded a little arrogant on my part. I want to clarify. I don't really believe that my thoughts and influence is all that important in the great scheme of things. If we move nearer the heart of God, it will be stimulated more so by prayer than thinking. I hope the tone of the post doesn't detract from the good discussion that has been running.
Can't talk about something as simple as if we should have an indoor basketball court, can you?
The fact of isolating ourselves is probably due to wanting to avoid having that denominational tag placed on us. If we were to work closer with one group verses another people might wonder if we were integrating more than a specific service.
This topic has me wondering at this time about our efforts with the flu shots. I've heard that the Methodist church in Minford was able to give shots, just hearsay, but from a reliable source. Now I'm certain the hospital is not showing any kind of favortism, it was probably more of a timing issue and with supplies running low we were affected.
My point is we are a small group compared to some other organizations that are giving shots, but say we went togther with another church or churches and offered a more community wide effort. This would certainly draw more people and probably move us up on the demand line to receive flu shots due to the increased number of people reached.
Hopefully we will get a supply of vaccinations and this will be a mute point, but something to think about for the future. If we went to the hospital and said that we could reach 100's of people verses 50-100, then we might look more appealing. Just thinking with you.
You have noted a perfect example. Obviously, there is no doctrinal reason why we could not cooperate with another fellowship regarding flu shots or any other community service effort. It is hard for us to go against the habitual pattern of separation that has been perpetuated for many years. The separtist mentality emanates from doctrinal convictions. This is where the rubber meets the road (at least in my mind). Our understanding of the pattern of the New Testament Church has a direct bearing on our outreach. The instrumental issue is a microcosm of a larger set of issues that collectively serve as a near impermeable boundary between us and other fellowships. Now, I'm not saying doctrinal convictions are not substantial. I welcome any comments that might argue the need to reaffirm these convictions. I'm just saying that the stakes are high.
Post a Comment