When I was in high school, my parents encouraged me to
participate in a local Presbyterian church. This particular church was
where my mother had grown up, and her parents had been active, long-time
members, as well.
My father had grown up in New York City, and had become a
member of an Episcopal church there. But, upon marrying my mother and
moving to Rochester, he willingly attended my mother's Presbyterian church.
In my sophomore year, soon after a new minister was
installed, the peaceful tempo of the Rochester church was upset within the
congregation. Within a few months, the new pastor had begun revealing
some of his ideas for the future direction of this tradition-bound
church. He seemed determined to transform us into an outward-looking
church actively seeking social justice.
It started with grumbling and whispered talk in the church
parking lot, after worship. Before long, there was open discussion, and
some Elders were protesting our new church direction at meetings of the
Session. Increasingly, the congregation was divided into two opposing
sides.
Meanwhile at home, I found that my parents were not in
agreement on the "social justice" direction sought by the new
pastor. My mom and her parents liked things the way they were. My
father was more in sympathy with the direction the new pastor wanted the church
to take. I would hear them debating the issue as they washed up the
dishes after dinner.
My mother and many of her friends who had grown up in the
church, were firmly set on emphasizing evangelism, not social justice.
They were active in Bible study and could quote Scripture for almost any
occasion. Mom insisted that this was how she kept on a straight path ----
by regularly reinforcing her Christian values through repeated reading and
appreciation of Scripture.
My father, on the other hand, had come from a different
style of religion, and from the more worldly environment of New York
City. He was very aware of the social and economic disparities in society
and wanted to do something about them. He became a supporter of the new
pastor's initiatives.
As time passed, each side in this church-wide
"debate" became more and more convinced they had the right
answer. There was little interest in compromise, and soon members of the
traditional/evangelical faction, began to leave the church.
I think about this now, years later, and wish I could go
back and change a few things for them. But, that church situation was not
unique. Arguably more blood has been spilled and more hearts broken
around church schisms than any other issue in the Presbyterian Church.
The Biblical understanding of the church as "the body
of Christ" was as revolutionary 2000 years ago as it is today.
Imagine how some of the original Disciples must have rolled their eyes when
Jesus introduced Simon the Zealot and Levi the tax collector into their
fellowship. Zealots were Jewish resistance fighters sworn to overthrow
the occupying Roman army. Tax collectors then were not the same as the
county officials we know today ---- they were collaborators with the Roman
occupation who sold out their people for a cut of the tax revenues.
But, notice this ---- it was not the Disciples
themselves choosing to affiliate with one another. They were all chosen
by Jesus. Only Christ, only the call of Christ, brought these people
together as Disciples. Jesus' free claim on them was what they had in common.
Paul's Scriptural message shows this insight ---- that hands
and feet don't join a body because they see the world the same way. Ribs
do not affiliate with ears because they share similar beliefs. Organs of
the body are formed and knitted together by the creative love of God.
What God hath joined together, let no one break apart.
When the Apostle Paul speaks of the church as "the body
of Christ," he reminds us of a far more basic reality than the narrow
interests of affiliation groups and our endless debates about whose values and
beliefs are better or more pious. Our unity does not lie in our points of
member agreement, but alone in our belief in Jesus Christ. We are united,
not because we have found a secret to consensus, but because Christ by the power
of the Holy Spirit unites us in and through and to Himself.
When a condition of "schism" occurs in the
congregation of a church, or they split into "groups" because people
want to bond with folks sharing identical values, it fosters a kind of self-righteousness
that runs counter to the spirit Christ seeks.
Our unity as a church is not based on conditional contracts
that hold only so long as we agree with one another, but on the basis of our
covenant with God sealed in Christ. Our church unity is the act of God,
not of ourselves.
C.S. Lewis once observed that "the church is that body
in which all members, however different, must share the common life,
complimenting and helping one another precisely through their
differences."
So, is CPC merely a voluntary religious association of
like-minded individuals? Would it not be more accurate to say that our
church is not a movement or a mood or a direction, but the balance of many
movements and moods. Thus, the members of our church seek and accept an
arbitration which ultimately strikes a balance focused on our Heavenly Father,
and not upon ourselves.
____________________________________________________________________________
These thoughts are brought to you by CPC's Adult
Spiritual Development Team, hoping to encourage you to pursue some personal
spiritual growth this winter at CPC.
____________________________________________________________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment