Boy, did you miss the point.
You assume that I am against denominations, I am not. I am for people who are passionate about the living God who is at work today. Yes and many denominational churches are involved in wonderful, dynamic ministries to the poor, oppressed, outcast, disenfranchised, etc. Many have food pantries, clothe closets, soup kitchens, etc. for people in their parish. Many go to city hall and represent those who have no voice in their parish.
I am working with some presbyterian missions who support a cooperative who are making our t-shirts this year. Not American Apparel but the women's sewing cooperative in Nicaragua. I heard about them at a presbyterian conference of other camps throughout the country. They gave out free chocolates to tell us about free trade and entrepreneurial cooperatives in South America. The dark chocolates were my favorite.
Denominations have a shelf life, God does not. That is not a negative statement towards denominations it is just true. We are near the expiration date now. Not that it is time for them to go, they are diminishing quickly. We see a constant drop in the numbers in the PCUSA and I hear it is in many other denoms as well.
But I have a question. Can anyone tell me what the value of a denomination is today? Is it the meeting once a quarter of pastors and elders? (Then why do so many pastors miss them?) Is it a common set of beliefs held by brothers and sisters who support one another? (Which ones constitute forming a denom?) Is it a fund raising mechanism for missions? (Then why are they closing missions and camps?) Can it be replaced? What happens to the churches in the denomination if the denoms no longer has power and authority on decisions made at the local level? What holds them together?
How can a "church" leave the denomination and a lawsuit erupts as to who owns the building? Are we talking about people owning the building or an institution? If presbyterian people within a church, form an independant corporation and decides to buy the property next door and build a multipurpose building, does the denomination own that or do the people who go to church there own that? What is the difference? Is the denomination people or someone out of district who is hired to own buildings, property, and pensions, but they never step foot on the property, never seen the building, never knew the person who is investing a portion of their paychecks in their future. If a church leaves their other denom and brings the church to the PCUSA and after 30 years decide to leave the PCUSA, who owns the building? Is the building denomination or is the people who are still attending the church? If it is the people how can they leave themselves?
Regarding doctrine... Are you saying that the Ku Klux Klan do not have a doctrine that is central? Are you saying that those who have developed deep ways of thinking of seeing people as unhuman or are not children of God, do not have doctrine? Of course they do. These people have doctrines. The Crusades was started with doctrines. Those in the south who were against Martin Luther King, had doctrines. These were church folks, my friends. The liberals who marched with MLK also had doctrines. Today we don't think of those people as liberal, but they were shunned by most white churches. César Chávez caused a lot of issues in the white churches. When the Mennonites supported him and the union, many MB churches left the denomination. In the SJ valley, many presbyterian churches were against what he was trying to do. It is hard to have farmers in your congregations and support farm laborer becoming unionized. (I think I just made the farmers mad.)
I am saying that those who follow doctrines more than scriptures can be very dangerous indeed. It is not having doctrine that is the problem, it is holding tighter to those than on to a God who transforms the heart and mind. Are we open to have our doctrines change? I had a friend who was so TULIPized that when it came to a woman with demonic harassment he could care less, because she was not saved. She was not called. There is an arrogance in some who have their tidy doctrines. There are some who go to seminary, Bible college, christian liberal arts universities, etc. who feel that they have studied and have the right doctrine because they were taught it by professors, who were taught theirs by professors, who were taught theirs by professors, who were taught theirs by professors, whoo...
I am not talking about people who are continually looking into the Scriptures, listening to the Spirit of God, in fellowship with like-hearted and minded people, who are working out there salvation with humility and awe. We all have doctrines. I have a doctrine of what makes a great calzone, which route is the fastest to San Luis Obispo, where to sit in the sanctuary, etc. I have a set of doctrines on my brothers and sisters who work in fast food and how they should be treated, how the Jesus speaks to me and others, the work of the Holy Spirit, the work of the cross, and the creation of the heaven and earth. But I would not go to war with my brother and sister over them. (That is a doctrine, isn't it?)
Are you open to a lot bigger God who is unfathomable fully, (we see through a glass dimly, don't we.) Or do you stick with what you know and are content there?
Actually, what you said about Calvin Crest is totally wrong. People who had a dream started Calvin Crest. Good men and women who gave up much of their time, moneys and talents started Calvin Crest. The denomination gave up a couple of times, but not George Crichton, Luke Fritz, R. D. LyonWilliam Eisenhower, and others who searched for a place where they could get away and teach, worship, play, and have fun in creation. Sandy Brown can tell you the whole history but I would not say that the denomination started Calvin Crest, individual people did.
And actually, we get less than 6% of our budget from presbyteries and churches. Those who come to camp: students in schools, guests groups, businesses, people who go to church presbyterian and other denoms as well as non-denoms, make up a great percentage of our budget and pay my salary. Individuals who still believe in the ministry also contribute a major portion as well. If I started teaching some of the things that our denom has published in the past few years, I would be asked to leave and people would not be coming.
Does the denom pay your salary or do the people in the pews who decide each week to come back to church where you serve give you your salary each month? If the people left the church, would Louisville take over and start paying your salary? We forget that it is people who do things not institutions. Institutions maintain institutions.
Feel free to tell me what the denomination is about today. Sell it. Here is an open forum.
15 comments:
I accept your apology.
I don’t have time to answer your broad swath of questions today, but let me start with your broadside against denominations.
I have no desire to suggest that all things a denominations does is good and I would be among the last to suggest that all the PC(USA) does is even Godly. I spend far more time that I care to trying to deal with the faults and fallout of our corporate life.
That said, what’s the alternative? I asked you to show me a model that works over time the way you think it should work. I’m still waiting for an answer.
You say “Denominations have a shelf life, God does not.” True certainly, but I think you have no real idea how long that shelf live can be.
Last year I was in the El Muallaqa Church in Cairo, Egypt. That church has been there for over 1000 years and is a part of the Coptic denomination that can trace it’s direct roots back 1500 years. They still minister very effectively to the minority Coptic Christians that live is great difficulty in Islamic Egypt. I would assume you believe they are past “shelf life”.
Across town is the Evangelical Theological Seminary, run by the 150 year old denomination called the Synod of the Nile. It was started by Presbyterians (mostly NA’s) and it supports a series of large and small churches up and down Egypt who could not exist without this supportive structure and the continued help from the PC(USA). Is their 150 denomination years too old?
A year before that I worshipped in St. Mark’s in Jerusalem, the church of a friend of mine who was born in the old city and is a member of the Syriac Orthodox Church – a church whose roots actually go back to the original church in Antioch in Acts 11. Certainly they are long past their shelf life. I’d hate to tell their members their extended group of community is out of date and ought to be scrapped.
“Can anyone tell me what the value of a denomination is today?” Drop in on any of these churches and ask. I suspect you’ll get some very good answers.
If you can’t travel that far, come to Washington and you can talk to the seven member church of Marlin in a town of about 20 who could not exist without the denomination’s help. Talk to the big church who we just spent almost two years helping work through the sexual misconduct of their pastor without having the church collapse and see if they think being a part of a denomination that exercises church discipline is worthless and out of date.
Tony, I think you have a very narrow reference point. I don’t think you have seen much of what God is doing around the world in these very human and faulty institutions you have no use for. Are they fallen and prone to error – of course. Show me an human institution that is not. Would you claim even Calvin Crest is immune from that?
But structure, authority, and doctrine have come with the church from the beginning. Every New Testament church had elders – “presbuteros” – appointed over them. Those churches were bound to the authority of the greater church as Acts 15 makes clear. These churches shared resources, sent missionaries, and corrected false doctrine. In a nutshell, they were a denomination by the functions of what a denomination does today. That structure is Biblical.
It’s easy to criticize something. It’s harder to figure out how to come up with a better system. Again, I ask, what system or structure do you recommend that will work much better? Show me somewhere when this is happening and working in a way that could replace what our current denominations do that you see as so wrong.
You still think I am against denoms. I am not. "Broadside against denoms" "Worthless and out of date"? Are you kidding me. Is that what I am saying? You haven't mentioned that I think robes are silly and choirs wear toupees, therefore lets get rid of music.
I have great deal of respect for the people who defined what they stand for, paying the cost.
What is the alternative? I think that was the argument given to William Wilberforce when he spoke of ending slavery. Are there only two ways to go? I use to think 8-tracks were the only way to go...
I am not saying that denoms shouldn't exist, just like I am not saying that the Catholic church should shut down and make room for Luther...
Thanks, Cory ˜
The question: "what is the point of denominations?" is perhaps too broad. Maybe you could narrow it down for us?
I tend to agree with Karl Barth's conviction that division in the Christian body is simply a reality, arising from our sinfulness, that we have to confront and in which we have to accept our complicity.
Here are a few quotes from his speech to the Second World Conference on Faith and Order in Edinburgh - 1937):
"In fact, we have no right to explain the multiplicity of the churches at all. We have to deal with it as we deal with sin, our own and others', to recognize it as a fact, to understand it as the impossible thing which has intruded itself, as guilt which we must take upon ourselves, without the power to liberate ourselves from it...we must pray that it be forgiven and removed, and be ready to do whatever God's will and command may enjoin in respect of it" (22-23).
"the union of the Churches is a thing which cannot be manufactured, but must be found and confessed, in subordination to that already accomplished in the oneness of the Church which is in Jesus Christ" (39).
twinkies also have no shelf life.
Tony -
I continue to read your blog not just because I genuinely like you but because you always ask the hard questions and bring up issues most folks shy away from. I thank you for continuing to share on this open forum.
I've been reading your last couple of entries and comments with interest...and frustration.. Normally I will make brief comments - mostly just pestering you to post more about your grandsons! They are only a day older than my twins so I know they must be full of life, laughter and energy. My babies are the light of my life - I know it is the same for you and your family!
So - I certainly can't comment on biblical references since I stopped studying the bible awhile ago. I was becoming more and more disappointed in how my denomination was preaching the Word. It's too bad I let that stop my journey - and I can't blame anyone but myself.
But here is the deal for me. I continue to be turned off by denominations and Al, I don't say this to defend Tony or to insult you (I'm sure you are a really nice person and I mean that with all sincerity), but reading your comments changes nothing for me. Though it's not your job to help me pick a seat in terms of my worship, I just can't shake the feeling that if I came to you and wanted more than just knowledge - that if I wanted and needed spiritual guidance, you wouldn't be able to give it to me in the way I needed. You seem to be an authority on Christianity but sometimes that is not what seekers are looking for.
I hesitate to leave my comment because I truly don't mean to be offensive. I really don't have much business commenting on such things as they are not my focus. But my emotions rather than my intellect are guiding me on this one.
Lara
Lara
How come no one responded to Lara?
>But here is the deal for me. I continue to be turned off by denominations and Al, I don't say this to defend Tony or to insult you (I'm sure you are a really nice person and I mean that with all sincerity), but reading your comments changes nothing for me. Though it's not your job to help me pick a seat in terms of my worship, I just can't shake the feeling that if I came to you and wanted more than just knowledge - that if I wanted and needed spiritual guidance, you wouldn't be able to give it to me in the way I needed. You seem to be an authority on Christianity but sometimes that is not what seekers are looking for.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Lara.
To be fair, Tony and I probably have more in common that we might seem. There is a great deal in denominations – especially in my PC(USA) denomination – that drives me nuts. That any single human institution is, to greater or lesser degrees, flawed is a given. We live in a fallen word. That all denominations are constantly in need of renewal and revision is an equal given. We see that even in the early church in Acts.
But, I see denominations like any human enterprise – even those created by God: flawed but necessary. Like Noah’s ark, we stand the smell on the inside, because things are worse on the outside.
Government is a good parallel. We all are driven nuts by our governments. They all do stupid things at times. But, is the solution anarchy? No, that would create far greater problems that those even the government visits on us.
Imagine if every time a group of the body of Christ began to organize themselves they had to invent everything they needed from scratch: what they believe about God, who could be a leader and what training they needed, who was responsible for what and what process do you use when someone does wrong? The list is long and daunting and uses up a lot of time and resources.
A denomination provides a structure, a history, and a support system to support individual bodies of believers so that churches can do ministry without constantly having to invent the wheel.
To the average church member, this is mostly invisible. As such, most church members don’t really care much about their denomination or see that it has much value. And in a way, that’s OK. When I drive down the road, I don’t think about the Washington DOT, I just don’t want to wreck my suspension by hitting potholes. You are aware of it the least when it’s working well.
Almost no one comes to my church anymore because they what to be Presbyterian. They come to be a part of our individual Christian community. Here, you would be like most people in my pews, they come for find Jesus, not the Presbyterian church. That’s how I came to Jesus myself. I’m a Christian first and a Presbyterian second.
I do believe that God meets us in many ways and in many cultural forms – yet, all must still be subject to the Word of God. So, while I am comfortable being Presbyterian, I am equally comfortable with people who choose to a part of a Baptist, or Roman Catholic, or Pentecostal community. In fact, one of the fastest growing Christian communities in the USA among young people is Eastern Orthodox!
If you are seeking God, you’ll find that in Scripture call calls us to seek and serve Him in community. There are certainly many different styles and expressions of Christians worship and community you can be a part of. If what you previously were a part of doesn’t work for you, find something that does. That is the beauty of the diversity of the Body of Christ – one size does not need to fit all.
I encourage you to find a place where you feel God is calling you. Perhaps this conversation is God’s prodding for you to start looking for that corner of the Body of Christ that is incomplete without you.
Al Sandalow
In my experience, the debate about denominations at best, draws attention away from the main thing. I would like to keep the main thing. the main thing. Having to endure a congregation that is rallying around the debate about denominations is driving me mad.
I want to rally around serving my neighbor as myself, and loving God before all else at my church home.
The debate lived out seems to overwhelm the leaders, who at one time, had pure intentions.
OK, so that does not add to the debate, or reconcile the issue at all. Really it is about loving students, and beyond camp, people with the love that has been given us. It certainly clarifies it for me (and gets me into trouble).
Tyson, You know that is really what I am saying. But today, what I hear most about is denominations. When I said something about denoms not being about the real thing, then I get my head handed to me on a platter.
Do you remember the conversation at Peet's in Davis about racial reconciliation? That began to change my doctrine as well as my heart. I think about that conversation often. Thanks for the convo.
T
Al,
Thanks for talking it out to Lara. What you said,
"Almost no one comes to my church anymore because they what to be Presbyterian. They come to be a part of our individual Christian community."
That is what I am saying. As Geoff said, ADD, is an issue. Articulate I am not.
And Lara, Al is a good man with a good heart and I appreciate the conversation.
Timbo,
It seems like there is a lot that you are mad about with me. I do appreciate the convo with you and I am sorry about the comments and hurt that I have caused to those pre-Sean.
T
Tony, I'm not mad. Rather, I am grieved by the unnecessary pitting of things that are good but imperfect against each other. Spirit versus theology; what's happening now versus what happened before. To be sure, some people do pit their sacred theology against the work of the Spirit and the past against the present. I've dealt with "those people," and I've at times even been "that person." The danger in correcting is overcorrecting, and falling into the trap of equal but opposite error, which is pitting the Voice you hear against that heard by others, whether by way of prayer or seminary study or whatever. God is a lot bigger, and if He can work through people who have a wide variety of gifts, why do we question it?
Al -
I truly thank you for sharing your insights. There is/was a lot to digest in what you wrote. In between chasing two energy-crazed toddlers, I plan on going back to read and ponder.
I was really wounded by my church. I witnessed hypocrisy - a lot of it. But I was very young then and instead of confronting this I chose to sweep it under the proverbial carpet. I continued to seek alternatives - other ways I could serve and, in a sense, be served. Unfortunately, this only fueled my fire as in addition to hypocrisy, I experienced closed-minded cliques. I was never invited in (which, in retrospect, is a very good thing).
So ya - blah, blah, blah. I could continue to gnash my teeth and furrow my brow. What I am seeing clearly now is that these old wounds needed to be revisited. I never dealt with them and that has kept me away from feeling God. He was always there (yup - certainly no atheists in any foxholes I've found myself in!) but I wasn't letting Him saturate my soul with love.
I was driving home last night after a lovely dinner with my father and sister - I felt good. And it dawned on me. I do believe in God. He is real. I don't ever have to doubt that again.
I'm pretty sure I will never be the church-going type again. I am married to a wonderful man who was even more wounded by his church than I. A church - a denomination - these just don't resonate with us. Our task now is to stay spiritually healthy so that our children can know God and make good choices about their path.
Anyway - thank you Tony and thank you Al. Neither of you knew it when writing - but you made a difference for me.
Lara
Post a Comment