It seems to me that if there should be unity of among anyone, it should be unity among Christians themselves. Christians seem to be one of the most divided groups. I know that complete unity of the mystical Body of Christ and perfection of all its members will only happen in the heavenly realms outside of our concepts of time and history. Because this is the direction of where things eventually will go though, I believe we can't separate our pursuit of Heaven and us striving for towards these things now.
We as people can be very different. Sometimes we're a little quick to assume because we don't understand someone, that they are wrong. I've done it many times in life. Someone's form of worship isn't what inspires me so I believe they are worshipping wrong, without trying to understand their perspective. I can make quick judgments on someone and immediately look down on them from my perspective, though not being honest with myself that I also have flaws. I went to a church where I felt we were the most right and everyone else was a little off. I started to get to know some Nazarenes and got critical when I found out they didn't let their members drink alcohol, even in moderation. I thought about how that wasn't biblical, and then something dawned on me. I went to a church that didn't allow their single members go on dates alone. It might be a very wise idea, not that not doing so would be wrong itself, but it could very easily lead into something they were trying not to do. Their not drinking alcohol was really no different than my church's rules. What is that appropriate line of an "acceptable" amount of alcohol vs. having gone too far? Could I really claim that I knew that perfect balance of not living overly pious to heading down some path of self-destruction?
I don't know if you've ever had a similar experience. Many times I've felt like I have the Christian life figured out and I know what's right and what's wrong, and I judge the world against myself or my church. These moments of clarity throw me off my pedestal and my 'reality' is shown to not really be reality. King David thought that man in Nathan's story was the worst man in this world, only to realize that man was himself. The most fundamentalist of us tend not to question who we should include and who we should exclude.
I can easily put down someone who I think isn't as smart as me or I feel doesn't have a handle on their life. I wouldn't be able to even count the number of times I've made a joke about homosexuals at a job, though at the same time, I have worried about someone finding out about my past history of misusing drugs and alcohol. It's easy to judge the other guy, much more than having clarity on who we are. How many of us have stepped into a church which went on and on about the other guy? The church down the road, the morally bankrupt outside of its walls, the danger of (fill in the blank) and it’s our job to fix them. No wonder that the heart of the Sermon on the Mount is really all about watching yourself and trying to live your own life well. Towards the end, Jesus says, Do not judge. For the same measure you judge others, you will be judged also. Though often when someone judges us, we want leniency. We want someone to know though we are not perfect, our intentions were good. We meant to best. We never meant to hurt anyone. We want mercy.
Since 2003, my old church has wanted mercy. They want to move on, and not be held by their past. They want and sometimes even demand that others forgive them. There have been many sermons on mercy, and fighting for unity with others though they will be imperfect. It's ironic considering how there has been a long history though of looking down on others outside of their church and I wonder if it just isn't Jesus' words being fulfilled that with the same measure you judge others, you will be judged also.
Many of its members during open discussion forums and former members, had been quick to say what is wrong with the organization and giving solutions on what they believe will make their church their version of what right is. I find that ironic since many of the original tensions and problems have stemmed from leaders confidently considering themselves right and not being open to a different perspective. So many of its critics are quick to say all of the reasons why the church is wrong, and if they just put this one idea into practice, or get rid of this, etc, all will be well. I do believe that many can and do have valid points with we could all learn from. I do think though that this is still the very same approach of the very church system's origins which they say they are against.
Obviously there needs to be a certain level of acceptance in life, understanding, compassion, and respect for the differences in others. I think sometimes on this idea we can go from one end of the spectrum of: I will tolerate you though I am 2 steps away from telling you you're stupid -to acceptance means not having any moral compass and let me not have a belief because it might offend you. Is there a middle ground though? Is there that perfect balance that everyone would agree upon in life as that pinnacle of what does acceptance mean while still believing you can stand for something in life?
I've known people who do believe in black and white answers in life, which I have been guilty of myself. As an alcoholic, much of my addiction has been about running away from stress in life, pain, and aiming for that perfect feeling with the use of drugs and alcohol. In my sobriety, I still have strong tendencies of being a perfectionist though my life has never been able to obtain perfection in any area. I remember a sermon in 2002 called, Church History: Where everything went wrong and how to fix it. (I have it on cassette tape in fact). The way everything was presented was that everything continued going downhill, accept for the Protestant Reformation, which then one branch led to the Restoration Movement, which then led to the International Churches of Christ, which was presented as going uphill spiritually, while other denominations missed the mark. Since then learning more about church history from more than one perspective, I don't share the same sentiments as the speaker of the sermon.
Many people I know would say that the first few chapters of Acts is exactly what the church should be like, presented as perfect unity, and perfect commitment which builds up the church in love. I would say though that everyone got along because no one really knew each other yet. With the early church thinking that Jesus could come back at any minute, did they really plan for the long haul, the daily mundane duties of life? 1 Thessalonians is a perfect example of this. Organized teamwork and ironing differences out really isn't on your mind when you think that you could get swept up any minute. Add in some people who are different like Gentiles, and you have the first major controversy within Christianity. Did the church maintain perfect unity? One would just have to read Galatians and hear about the tension between Paul, James the Just, and Simon Peter, pillars of the starting church. Perfect unity didn't exist by the time one of the first books we consider New Testament cannon was written.
Maybe at least we could have the appearance of unity if we pretend differences don't exist. We could shut our brains off to any type of critical analysis and observation. Sometimes I think some people do believe this is a good idea based on an unwillingness to talk about difficult topics and using mass generalizations in life. There is no type of group intimacy though through this approach. I wonder how many times in life we miss an opportunity for personal growth or understanding another person which can lead to deeper respect because of avoiding sensitive topics. Many times a sensitive topic does get discussed it often does lead to conflict though not understanding. Appearing to get along without understanding is not unity though, but merely pretentiousness which is no real unity at all.
I used to think that the right answer in life or the perfect way to do something was atainable if I just tried hard enough to find it. I think we as humans, we want clear answers. My old church calls its roots the Restoration Movement, this idea of looking back to the 1st century would lead to a perfect church. Church historians use this term though to describe this as a fad in the 19th century which also includes the Christadelphians, Seventh Day Adventists, and the Jehovah Witnesses, all of which are very different from each other. If you still have any doubts that the perfect church is attainable, do a little history digging into how many people started up experimental religious communities on the American frontier named Utopia. No one has the perfect church.
Christian unity was something I didn't give much thought to until I felt exclusion from other Christians. I heard recently that a friend of mine is being asked to choose one church over another right now. My views on unity have changed dramatically over the years as I've become to see a much different picture of Christ. Here are some of the reflections on God and Christ that I've had which have changed how I approach this idea of unity.
Absolutes of Religion
God said to Moses, "I am who I am . This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'Exodus 3:14
I don’t know how many times I’ve been to a number of denomination services and the preacher is complaining about how people don’t believe in absolutes anymore. Usually I’m not sure what they are talking about, since that could be taken a number of different ways. What I do understand though is when they give an opinion like it is something that is black and white, as if their words are the Alpha and Omega, the first and last on any subject.
I have heard a preacher once talk about how parents should keep their kids from myspace.com and having cell phones. I’ve heard someone say that Christians should stay out of bars and be careful on what movies they should watch. There might be some wisdom in those things, though people are bound to have different views on those things and where these invisible boundaries lie. I’ve also heard though people say, ‘that church down the street- they don’t teach true discipleship’ , ‘the Lutheran Church is a lukewarm church’ and one of my favorite, ‘our church practices Lordship best in the city.’
(The “we do Lordship best” comment confused me the most. We’re all a little bit subjective, but as far as who is the best at being committed to Christ, Christ said it would be the greatest servant. A homeless person in the city's slum neighborhood might say the Franciscans at the St. Joseph Worker House with their soup kitchen. As far as evangelism, I live 3 blocks away from their church meets, have never had any of them knock on my door, yet have had 3 other churches from the neighborhood knock on my door- not counting Jehovah Witnesses. The comment just reminded me of the Pharisee’s prayer who compared himself to someone else in a prayer. Either way, I don’t think the comment was a commitment to Christ’s humility.)
As a kid, I had always been fearful to question things which I considered sacred like religion. Sometimes it would dawn on me that my unwillingness to question the beliefs of Christianity was really no different than the people of Jesus’ day who rejected Christ because he did not match their interpretation of who they thought the Messiah would be. Three big reasons on why he was so easily dismissible was 1) he claimed equality with God 2) he broke laws such as interacting w/ unclean people and ignoring Sabbath laws and 3) he was cursed by the law for having died on a tree. These may not seem like big things to us, but for people back then, this would have been huge. We as Christians brag about being black-and white thinkers, yet black-and white thinking would automatically reject the validity of Jesus Christ.
I had heard religious authorities condemn all rock music because of the lyrics of some rock music. Preachers proclaimed the Republican Party as God’s party since they were pro-life. Good kids went to church. Bad kids smoked cigarettes. Everyone fell into 2 categories: good or bad. One year in a Christian elementary school, I saw a kid who picked on the geeks on the playground yet was respectful toward teachers get an award for “Most Christ-like Student’. A teacher told us that if you arrange the letters of “Santa” it spells “Satan”, proof that Santa Claus was invented to destroy Christmas. When I mentioned that “santa” is Spanish for “saint”, the teacher just changed the subject. It seemed Christianity was just for those who wanted to be right even when they contradicted themselves. My views on Christianity being a religion for the ignorant was a big part of what led to my agnosticism as a teenager.
By the time I was a young adult, I needed “saving” even in obvious ways such as emotionally, life stability, and from alcoholism. I couldn’t shake this idea of “the God willing to die for me” though much of my ideas of the religious world, I wanted no part of. I had met a group of Christians who seemed very dedicated to trying to fix the mistakes of what they didn’t like found in religion either. They had a lot of noble ideas which I thought Christianity would only be worth pursuing if one were to do it with some nobility and seriousness. Yet the idea of shutting my brain off, to fill it with creeds didn’t appeal to me. One verse I read spoke to me, that maybe I could do this.
"If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." John 8:31-32
I figured- maybe if I try to put Christian ideals into practice, maybe it will show itself to be true. If it’s wrong, then I quit. I had tried so many other venues which didn’t work, what would be the harm in trying one other thing. More than anything, I wanted to be set “free” from the things that plagued me the most., anger, addiction, despair, and paranoia. Maybe I could be both a Christian and a critical thinker (or a term I heard later on, Berean).
In time I saw this group was not free from an unwillingness to question either. So many of the things I could see them being of some benefit, so I really didn’t want to butt heads with anyone. They were trying to do such a good thing, so why make trouble over the details when you’re looking at the big picture? Invite someone to church every day. –at least it’s something positive. People should go to our church, and I should not go to another church. –why? You’ve tried other churches. They have problems which you know. You’ll be sending a message that you accept those problems as tolerable if you go there. Other churches just like to justify themselves, here we will tell it to you straight. I could see logic in all of that thinking. (there’s a lot of irony there on how they justified themselves and you really couldn’t tell it to the leaders straight). Other “churches” were the ones that made me question the validity of Christianity. In time I had gotten my own ‘black-and white” thinking; my group was right, everyone else was wrong.
Is this a bad thing? I went from being an alcoholic with a failed marriage to trying very hard to be a good Christian. I could see someone asking why I am just not grateful. In life isn’t the only thing we can hope for is to progress and grow as people? Even if I was becoming similar to the people I looked down on as a kid, isn’t it still an improvement from living in complete self indulgence? An idealist never settles for anything less than perfect, I'm not an idealist because I know life will never be perfect. Most people would admit that any improvement is better than no improvement at all. Would I choose a mobile home over a cardboard box? Yes, any day. If I was starving and someone gave me crackers, I would not complain that it wasn’t pizza. Looking back on it though, I see that my focus was on comparing a less than perfect thing to what I thought was possibly an even more flawed thing. Nothing is wrong with that at all. People do that with politics and philosophies all the time. In doing so though, I make it a social message, and it ceases to be a Christian message. My eyes are on the peripheral instead of the Center. By comparing the non-absolutes as if one is absolute, I make myself the measure on who gets judgment and who gets mercy- and it tends to be my own group that gets the mercy and others who get the judgment.
It seems that we all want tangible absolutes, thinking we’ll find them once we guess the right formula. Once we think we’ve reduced everything to an absolute category, an absurdity pops up. I like Chesterton’s words from The Paradoxes of Orthodoxy. "The real trouble with this world of ours is not that it is an unreasonable world, nor even that it is a reasonable one. The commonest kind of trouble is that it is nearly reasonable, but not quite. Life is not an illogicality; yet it is a trap for logicians. It looks just a little more mathematical and regular than it is; its exactitude is obvious, but its inexactitude is hidden; its wildness lies in wait. I give one coarse instance of what I mean. Suppose some mathematical creature from the moon were to reckon up the human body; he would at once see that the essential thing about it was that it was duplicate. A man is two men, he on the right exactly resembling him on the left. Having noted that there was an arm on the right and one on the left, a leg on the right and one on the left, he might go further and still find on each side the same number of fingers, the same number of toes, twin eyes, twin ears, twin nostrils, and even twin lobes of the brain. At last he would take it as a law; and then, where he found a heart on one side, would deduce that there was another heart on the other. And just then, where he most felt he was right, he would be wrong".
Everything in our core says there should be an absolute. Even science says the human mind tends to look for patterns. Everything alludes to the idea that there should be absolutes but is just slanted enough to throw us off track. Thomas Merton had said in No Man is an Island, that everything in reality really just points to Absolute Reality which only exists in the spiritual realm. Things can help us better understand God, but we hold onto those things, ideas, and methods too tightly they become idols and roadblocks to our relationship with God. These conflicts of logical vs. illogical are just enough to prevent us from looking to ourselves and getting lazy vs. not resting in our pursuit of the Absolute, God. "Creation was made subject to futility" (Rom. 8:20 NAB). Everything in our material world is neither logical nor absurd but somehow a little of both.
We believe in a book that says ‘The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you. How much less this temple I have built!’, but we believe that God can fit in the much smaller space of our skulls. "Can you fathom the mysteries of God? Can you probe the limits of the Almighty? They are higher than the heavens—what can you do? They are deeper than the depths of the grave -what can you know?” “His wisdom is profound, his power is vast.” This is a taste of the absolute.
I had elevated the leaders of my organization to being the Way, and I looked down on anyone who I felt didn’t measure up to me. If someone left our church, we did not consider any point they could make since they were obviously not committed. Genesis says that all men are created in the image of God; John says in his 1st epistle that no man is without sin. We are Chesterton’s “broken gods”. Yet everything in our nature wants to compare ourselves against other flawed creatures. We label ourselves good or bad, when in fact we are both good-not quite and bad-not quite. Someone had told me that they heard that someone we knew had gone off on the deep end in their beliefs. I’m not sure exactly where this deep end starts, but when I asked him for details he had none. He didn’t know what that meant, but he felt comfortable passing it off that this guy went off the deep end, though he didn’t even know why he was labeled this. It seems so often all we do is compare ourselves to each other. If we're focused on God though, everyone is at the foot of the cross, being ignorant and flawed.
I think if we could really use any categories confidently, it would be “God” and “not God”. One can decided for themselves in which category they fall into. If God is the I AM, then all I can say is “I am NOT”.
A Unifying Source
If God is shrouded in mystery, then it’s easy just to leave it at that and not pursue God. Maybe agnosticism is attractive because either way you will be right. If there is a God, you’re right; if there isn’t a God, you’re also right. If your goal in life is to never have an intellectual error, agnosticism is a safe choice. To have belief seems either really brave or really foolish, especially to go after pursing doctrine. But it seems even if we don't believe in God, we make our opinions and judgments God. I've never met anyone who didn't have a God, even if they didn't have a God. That is, I’ve never met someone who doesn’t have an opinion and doesn't follow something, even if it's just their desires or their choices. CS Lewis makes a good point in ‘Now theology is like the map... Consequently, if you do not listen to theology, that will not mean that you have no ideas about God. It will mean that you have a lot of wrong ones...” Whatever our views on God are will affect our church environment.
We don't come together unless we have something to come to. The more important that something or common thread is, the stronger our unity. I might like a movie and someone else likes the same movie, but once we quit talking about that movie, unless some other interest comes along, a conversation will die. People who share strong patriotism unite together to possibly give up their lives for a war, but I don't know any group of people who've done that for a movie. Unity seems to never last very long either, because nothing is every really that perfect and nothing lasts forever. For unity to really work and last, it has to be based on the Perfect and the Everlasting. It has to be based on God.
God had created a community when He made His covenant with Abraham. Before that though we see communites and relationships where God wasn't the focal point. Cain killed Abel out of jealousy, "sons of God" and "daughters of men" in Noah's day got together for only pleasure, and when people did get together to do something positive and constructive, though only for self-glory, their tower fell. I always have to stop and think, if my motivation in life is based on competition, pleasure, or self-glory, it's very likely I am not following God, even if it's something good. With God being such a mystery and us being so lost, it seems that the only times we've been able to go toward God is when He has directly intervened with us.
In Scripture, it does seem that we tend to get our own ideas about God and God had to spell things out for us for us to get even the smallest glimpse of Who He is. Our ideas are always much smaller than who He really is. Our ignorance, insecurity, and hatred many times mold into shape our idols, our impression of who God is. I would often be quick to talk about some religious topic that I didn't feel so confident about because I felt that I had to appear to know it all in order to be an effective Christian. Ironically some friends over the years have told me that I've seemed to lose my convictions. I think I've only grown in my convictions on who God is and who I am not.
I do think there are some mindsets we easily fall into though as a result of strong unity. Unity can easily fall into elitist attitudes, the assimilation of cult-like uniformity, and a self serving hierarchy where those on the bottom of the food chain often get over-looked. There is something about God though that shows He does not want the characteristics of some man-made organization. Just when we thought maybe we knew something about God, He revealed something about Himself that no one could have imagined. He is Absolute and Infinite, One and Only, but He is not alone. He is a Father, but He is also a Son, and a Holy Spirit. He is a Family unto Himself, a Diversity-in-One. He is a Trinity.
My wife and I are the "authorities" in the house, but everything probably revolves around the baby. We don't leave the house without packing a diaper bag- in fact our whole day is usually scheduled around his naps and meals. We're no Mother Theresa's or amazing people, we're just parents. It's what parents do. In a family the littlest one tends to be the most important. It's not about how talented you are. Everyone means just as much to the family as anyone else. Parents live for their kids.
Even before creation, the Father looked to the Son and the Spirit, the Holy Spirit looked to the Father and the Son, and the Son looked to the Father and Spirit. The very nature of God Himself is selfless. I think about how 2 lovers can get consumed in their relationship and become isolated from the rest of the world. But their love creates a child and they're brought to a new level of selflessness. Their love is no longer about the exclusion of everyone else, it starts to include others, their children into their relationship. The heart of God is about inclusion. The very nature of God is selflessness, creating- which is all about "including", love, and life. I really believe that the 'name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit' is much more than just some ritualistic formula (Matt 28:19), but what we are to identify with/ immerse ourselves into to better understand who God is. God went from from not giving us a name because it would have been above our understanding (Judges 13:18) to finally giving us a name He thought maybe would begin to reflect who He is. Our invisible God finally had a face.
We can only come to unity by looking to God. But by looking at God, He in His very nature is looking outward; we see all of humanity, the heart of creation. We see the value of the lowest individual because that is what God values- not the missions or crusades or plans we put in place to make the world a better place. Only then do we see people through God's eyes. God is not interested in sacrificing what we consider "expendable people for the greater good". He is the One who leaves the 99 for just one sheep.
Many times I've made an organization more important than the individual. I lived on building an organization. I remember so often there was a big concern on whether "sharp" people were entering the church or those who would only be a burden. It wasn't that long ago that a woman was complaining to me that there were not enough "sharp" men to help bring in more highly esteemed people into the singles' ministry. She told me how she had brought one of her coworkers to an event and a mentally handicapped man was picking his nose. I would be really embarrased too, but this is not the heart of Christ who was seen with prostitutes and lepers.
Also I believe we have to ask ourselves what it is we are committed to if we are doing more excluding than including. I remember an evangelist who felt committment levels were dropping. That led to a phase where he just talked about how this denomination and that denomination were uncommitted. He had announced from the pulpit that he was pulling a woman's membership for recently having had married a Catholic. During that time though, none of the members became anymore committed. In fact, it didn't seem that he had become anymore committed either, at least to anything constructive. Maybe there will be times where it's believed that someone could really damage a church environment and something needs to be addressed. Our commitment though needs to be toward the God who longs to draw us to Him, not to mere exclusion itself.
I believe it's easy to get wrapped into obeying a command, try to live according to some type of Judeo-Christian principles, but miss the picture of who God is Himself. I think of how it's even easy to look at just one expression of the Trinity, and get a warped view from not taking the other 2 into mind. I think it's easy in our minds (only because we often do it) for the Father to become a cold impersonal judge, maybe even a control freak, the Son to become an eccentric crazed dreamer, and the Holy Spirit to be viewed as an ambiguous Power that runs through the Universe. Keeping the whole Trinity in mind we get a much clearer picture of who God is (Eph 3:14-19).
"Though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross.Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
Our Disfunctional Family
There is much more I was planning on saying, but the more I think about it, we as people just don't naturally like each other. By Christ becoming man, He was associating Himself with the very worst of mankind. We get so worried about our self image that we are so quick to defend that we are not like that person or group. There is alot of irony that the strongest words of Christ that are documented were directed toward a group whose name translates to "the set apart" remnant (Pharisee).
A friend told me that his church says that another church nearby doesn't teach the true gospel. I do not know their reasons why they claim this. I do know that though the early church had differing opinions among each other, but all the major issues that they did declare "heresy" in the first 5 centuries all revolved around who God was Himself: the Trinity, and the humanity and Divinity of Christ. They focused on the most important issue that united them: Christ.
Eight years ago, my old church said other churches may have good things to say, but they didn't live the life. Over the years "the life" has dindled; they cannot say they are the most evangelistic, charitable, or even friendliest church in the city anymore. I can't say they even know their Bibles more than people in neighboring churches. I had talked to the church leader before on the idea of trying to interact with neighboring churches. He stated that his opinion is that we should always be a little bit leery. Once he knew of a campus ministry that was making an impact, but they also had students who got drunk and were immoral. Apparently he wasn't familiar with the past history of his own church's teen and campus ministry.
Jesus did say he was bringing a sword that would turn people against each other (Matt 10:34-35). A major sword though in that first century ended up being their familes and even fellow brothers in the church turning against them for their acceptance of Gentiles. We are told not to separate weeds from wheat (Matt 13:29). John Fischer asks a great question regarding this in his book, 12 Steps for the Recovering Pharisee. "Would you rather accidently include someone who isn't a Christian, or accidently exclude someone who is?" Before we answer that question too quickly, the ones that Christ gathers, He associates so closely to Himself, He considers them to be a part of His own Body (Ephesians 5:25-32). When we exclude someone who is a Christian, in some sense, we are not accepting all of Christ.
Aside from personal experiences, one of the things that got me to think of unity in a new light was Henri Nouwen's book, Return of the Prodigal Son. Both brothers are very different, though both have an inaccurate view of who the Father is.
Going to the Father though we often run into the older brother. In fact, we are often both brothers at different times. Reading that story I've often wanted the Father to put the eldest brother in his place. If I'm honest with myself though, I've been the older brother many times, being critical, trying to control someone else. I was very bossy and manipulative to a fellow member of my old church, who I went and apologized to years later. He actually tried to convince me that my trying to control him was godly! Toward the end of the conversation, he started talking about all of these people who left our old church for "flakey" churches and how they gone off track. I helped contribute to his idea that there is anything godly about that. My ways were the same as the older brother's, not the Father's, though we often get them confused.
When we're not carefully listening for the Father's voice, we can confuse our voice or the voice of others for God's. We need to forgive ourselves and others. Forgiving doesn't mean we submit to the older brother though. We both need mercy and need our Perfect Father.
There are positive qualities in both brothers. One is adventurous and passionate, though when misguided he leads to self destruction. The other is responsible, reliant, and dutiful, though can easily become self-righteous, critical, more focused on duties than heart. In the parable, the Father's quiet voice wants union with both of them and He hopes for union between them both.
