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 were long-time, active 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, the peaceful tempo of the Rochester
church was upset within the congregation, soon after a new minister was
installed. Within a few months, he 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 this
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 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 "debate" became
more and more convinced they had the right answer. There was little
interest in compromise, and soon 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. 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 history of 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 were not the same as the county
officials we know today; they were collaborators with the Roman imperial
occupation who sold out their people for a cut of the tax revenues.
But notice this: the disciples did not choose
to affiliate with one another; they were 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.
Thus, Paul's message: 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 in Jesus Christ alone. 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 the spirit of a church "schism" occurs, or
the splitting into groups that share the same values, it fosters a kind of self-righteousness
that runs counter to the spirit of Christ.
Our unity as a church is not on the basis of 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 by their
differences."
So, is CPC merely a voluntary religious association of
like-minced 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 the ultimate
arbitration which strikes a balance between them.
________________________________________________________________________________
These thoughts are brought to you by CPC's Adult
Spiritual Development Team, hoping to encourage you to pursue some personal spiritual
growth this spring at CPC.
________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment