Realizing that going on about presuppositions, assumptions, and theological paradigms, probably makes little sense to many folks, I would like to provide an example.
I've become friends with David Garshaw. David is the minister (or coach, as he likes to say) at First Christian Church . This is the congregation just across from our Innermission building in town. First Christian Church is a Disciples of Christ congregation. They are heirs of the Stone-Campbell Movement just as are we. Disciples of Christ and Churches of Christ became distinct denominations officially in 1906, however the divide happened over a period of several years prior to and post-1906. In fact, the separation of the folks that came to be the Sunshine CofC from the Sciotoville Christian Church occurred in 1912. Our congregation's beginning was a product of the very tension that across America was dividing the whole of the Stone-Campbell Movement.
What was that issue? It is too much an oversimplification of the situation to say it was about instrumental music. It is true that a piano was involved, but a piano cannot account for a divide as significant as this.
David recently handed me a little book entitled, A Handbook for Today's Disciples. It is a brief primer in the history and current practice of the Disciples of Christ denomination. It is written "to help present-day church members understand the heritage, mission, thought, worship, and structure of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)."
Let me share this quote from the book:
The New Testament church was an informal fellowship of those who believed in Jesus Christ. Communities of Christians took root throughout much of the Mediterranean world, but there was no unifying structure, no uniform pattern of local organization, and no constituted order of clergy. Historical inertia had not yet carried the church through its natural growth toward organization because it had not yet at that moment recognized either long-range or large-scale tasks. Unity was lodged in spirit and in the lordship of Jesus Christ. [emphasis is mine not D. Duane Cummins- author]
The divide that occurred around about the turn of the 20th Century can partially be explained by competing assumptions about church organization. We, in the CofC, would state that there is, in fact, a pattern of local organization and any deviation from such pattern is an "innovation" of man outside the authority of the NT. Those who would come to be Disciples believed that greater organization is needed, it was natural, hence they embraced concepts like para-church missionary societies designed to consolidate and organize missionary efforts of a multitude of independent congregations. Likewise, given their assumptions about biblical authority and church organization, the introduction of mechanical instruments in worship was no big deal. For those who were to become the CofC, any para-church body or any change in worship that could not be literally read from the pages of the NT were violations of biblical authority. This whole divide is predicated upon where one stands with regard to the assumption that there is or isn't a discernible pattern of local congregational organization within the pages of the NT. Ultimately, pianos are nothing more than a symbol of this significant difference in NT understanding.
Given the CofC assumption about a pattern of organization, often referred to as Pattern Theology, passages like Colossians 3:16 and Ephesians 5:19 seem to clearly teach that a capella singing is the only authorized manner of praise. My point in writing this is to illustrate that the clearness of such passages is contingent upon one or more underlying assumptions. Have you ever wondered why other Christ-followers cannot apprehend the plain teachings of Scripture? I am suggesting that this wonderment is a product of differing assumptions, assumptions that are outside the consciousness of one or both parties in disagreement.
I offer this as a case in point illustrating the relationship between an assumption (often beyond our conscious awareness) and the issue at hand.
I would love to hear or read your thoughts on the above.
Friday, January 23, 2009
A case in point
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
For some reason I've been drawing some real correlations between your blog posts, the messages we've heard Wednesday & Sunday about the parable of the talents & missions, and conversations I've had this past weekend.This may be a stretch but maybe not.
I've had a very brief exposure to the theology of the ultra-conservative CofC. If my memory serves me correct, evangelism in those types of congregations seems to center on "being right" in understanding. However, that type of preoccupation seems to reflect the character of the servant who hid his talent. On one of the links in your postings below, I read where someone suggested a debate on Todd Deaver's position. All of that "proving to be right" hs undoubtedly caused more harm than good. As a small child I remember saying after a sermon that I hated Baptists - the sermon made me think that there was nothing worse than a Baptist - and I had no idea what one even looked like! The fear of being in error prevented good actions of brotherhood and took energy away from reaching the hurting. Sunshine, fortunately, has not taken such a position!
Part of me wants to believe that the points you are making regarding conservative CofC positions is directly related to the position we are in as a congregation. The spirit is stirring and there is a strain in the ship pulling to stretch the sails. Perhaps God will lead us into unchartered waters with ministries and changed lives that we cannot even imagine. Jon frequently quotes the Lord saying if He "be lifted up, He will draw all men to himself." I sense something good is presently unfolding in our congregation and that we may be in for a revival.
Just some thoughts.
I, too, sense that good things are happening within and about our congregation. I want to say clearly that I am convinced that the best action I take on behalf of our congregation is to pray for it. Prayer far outweighs in significance anything I write or say regarding Stone-Campbell history, assumptions, etc. Nevertheless, I believe (obviously) that examination of such things is a worthwhile pursuit.
Secondarily, I can honestly say that its not my goal to change anyone's position on any particular issue. I used to be more issue driven, but now I am moreso motivated by the joy of self-discovery.
Since my early college days, I've been trying to find myself on the map. At first it was comparing/constrasting publications like Wineskins (progressive) with Firm Foundation (conservative). These differences reside within the noninstrumental CofC world. I then began to see myself against the larger backdrop of the Stone-Campbell Movement with its 3 similar, yet disctinct extant expressions. Then, the SCM against the backdrop of the 2nd Great Awakening, and all that makes up the 19th Century American frontier. --the Protestant Reformation, and on and on---
Its a passion that I only hope will one day prove more significant and useful than simply providing the next high along my journey of self-discovery. Hopefully, I'll still have some friends left when I get there!
You will have lots of friends left. One thing is for certain about the SCM and that is the attention given to the entire scripture and how it all must work together. One of the great treasures of learning we have at Sunshine is that we look at the entire Word of God together and do not pull verses out of context. It means what it says, but seemingly contradictory passages still musty work together.
I enjoy your postings and meant to say so this morning in the hall. Thanks and please keep it up!
This is perhaps a topic or near so to one I have wished to work around for a very long time.
What "angle" should we approach from?
To what do I belong when I become a Christian? Certainly the Church, but what from there?
What are the influences that have created the diverse " " fill in the word, which one fits: churches, beliefs, faiths, religions, ............ Is Sunshine any different from the rest?
I am often asked where I attend "Church" so they will know what I believe. The organization I am with carries more than what I believe. Very few wants to hear I am part of God's Church and I believe in the Bible.
I like and prefer some organization to things. Sometimes others' organization looks like total chaos to someone else yet the individual functions in high order as it is.
Can organization be bad? Certainly! When it offers no solution or help or perhaps when it even damages real progress. When the process of organization becomes the thing itself and takes the place of the what it attempts to organize. "Organization" can destroy things.
It does not mean that all organization is bad or wrong, but it should not the main focus or purpose.
Let's suppose and start with the thought that the NT Church met as an informal fellowship. What would those meetings have been like and about? When and where, how often and for how long did they meet? Did they strive for a certain number of attendees. What was the purpose of meeting, was it worship?
I often get the general feeling that they believed in Jesus returning in their lifetime and perhaps in not that many days and they lived as such. Things that were established and set up were things out of necessity. People needed food or other items. People needed help with their lives and man's teachings.
Where are we at today?
What is the gathering of Christians together for?
What purpose should it serve?
What is the proper method for these meetings to be conducted?
Is God concerned with my clothes, my timely arrival, the size of my offering to or my membership in the organization I am attending?
When you look at the literal publications of organized religions and realize the depth of the structure with-in, it makes you stop and wonder what all you must have missed when you read the Bible. How did I miss all of these requirements for worship that God expects? Or did I?
One of my most favorite quotes from a movie : "You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means"
I like that quote, Mike.
The most important gain for me as a result of my quest to better understand my religious heritage has been humility. By humility, I am not suggesting that I am a more righteous guy than I was before. What I mean is that I have become more open to different understandings of things and that has led me to appreciate some people and practices that previously I could not.
What I can now see is that there is a "logic" to differing Christian practices and organizations. Of course, it is a different logic than that which informs my heritage. Understood on its own terms (and historical developmental tract) it can be seen to be sensible. That does not mean I agree that it is best. Humility does not mean I accept it, it simply enables me to understand it.
The "logic" is built upon presuppositions and/or assumptions about reality. I can now see that if I replace one of my assumptions with another assumption then a different result now makes "sense."
Since assumptions are extremely difficult to prove or disprove, the process is humbling.
I understand what you mean. I used to be very dead set for and against a few things myself in the past. I have since determined some are worthless to consider while others may not be as they appeared from my, then point of view.
I have ... stepped back for a while to observe. Things move very quickly and I find that some react like people at an auction. If you have not been to one, people can often get caught up in the mood, the flow, the competition, the ( numerous more possibilities ) and items can go for more than they should - I was at a store closing sale and saw things go for more than the shelf price. Others sit and wait till it is to late to act.
What I believe I see is that there is no one single big "problem" but several smaller ones, some in series with others. Some are not even problems but are perceived as and being dealt with on an equal footing as "real" ones.
I am not totally against organization. There are people that cannot function without it. There are also people that cannot function with it. Like all too many things, some balance has to be achieved not just for the 2 groups combined, but for each one separately.
Discussions are great, as a side point I believe it is one of the pass-times that God gave us as a gift, like so many other things.
What concerns me more is time. We talk it but we do not believe it, our actions bear it out. We may die this night or the world may end. Anyone reading this should search themselves even now to see how they feel. If you feel or realize that our time is short or at least unknown we should be more of action.
What would be the most important thing for us to do right now?
What I mentioned in the post before is only a possible starting point.
unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.
It is all much simpler than we acknowledge. Yet we are like Naaman, it must be some great thing.
What is really expected of us? Before assumptions are made or even needed, what can we know?
I realize that your question is rhetorical, nevertheless, I think we know an answer. Love.
Love is the goal of the journey and the pinnacle of knowledge. Love should be in consideration at all times, even when we are thinking through theological paradigms and the assumptions that undergird them.
What is good doctrine or good church structure? I think its fair to say it is that which does not constrain or constrict the flow of God's love. Another words, it is that which upholds and supports God's Will and Purpose.
At some point, when we have stared at the pages of Scripture for so long that our eyes have crossed, we could profit by stepping back and considering Love. Maybe we can gain some traction where we were formerly spinning our wheels.
Returning to the concept of humility-- I "know" that my increased appreciation of differing people and practices is good because it has enabled God's love to flow more freely in my heart and expressed in my behavior.
I feel compelled to grow nearer the heart of God because I can no longer derive assurance from the simple fact of being a CofC member. Consequently, my sense of assurance has never been higher. I value prayer now more than ever because I truly am realizing that real change/progress in this world has more to do with the heart of God than the mind of Jason. And, I am now in fellowship with Christians that previously I ignored.
I say all this because though at times it may seem that I am all about "counting angels on a pinhead," truly it is about a desire to be all that God would have me to be (and see Sunshine be all it can be). [If I seem defensive, it is not that I feel challenged, I just got on a roll.]
hmmmm, been wondering how to reply. Love is one area to be sure but not quite where I was going.
Actually, I find this is a VERY difficult subject / topic area to discuss because many do not think in this way. It is really just the basics that are needed.
Everything I see that God or Jesus has done has always been very simple. I fully believe that is the way it truly was and is meant to be. It takes man to really complicate things.
There are so many different things I would love to discuss, not argue, with people that are truly searching, but for now I will pose these thoughts.
I believe the present life-style that most Christians pursue is wrong or at the extreme least is so extraordinarily damaging that is far less than healthy.
I have discussed this next question with others and to me, it gives some insight into a small part of a problem, that is: What is wrong with the Church?
I said before that I believe there are several smaller problems that create the bigger ones. I think I see several indicators, but maybe it is just me.
I cannot really say I know the correct question(s) to ask or the best answer(s), but that is what I have been looking for and not just for me alone.
Post a Comment