I once heard Karin Heller, a theology professor at Whitworth, say that she would rather see an impure church than a divided church. She is a devout Catholic, but sees great problems with her church; when asked if she would ever leave, however, she stated that the greatest way she sees fit for there to be change is only if people are willing to work from the inside out.
I began thinking about this while reading Missional Church, edited by Guder. Explaining the history of the North American church, it is brought up that denominations began to compete with one another. “No one church could establish complete domain throughout the colonies… the issue of pluralism had to be faced.” Pluralism, as we discussed in class, is the concept that all ideas brought to the table are legitimate and must be recognized.
While I believe that all ideas must be legitimized, especially being very familiar with people in non-Christian culture, I do wonder what this means for mission. Is pluralism within the church something that ought to be accepted? The denominational system became the resolution for the colonial problem of church. I grew up in a denominational church myself, but I can’t help but be reminded of the times when non-Christian friends of mine say that they simply cannot trust an institution so wrought with enmity within itself.
I propose no real resolution to this: I don’t know what genuine unity looks like; I am participatory in the dissent often, myself. But I do see it as a barrier to missional nature of Christ’s church. Maybe it isn’t that denominations are the problem, but the competitive nature (referring to the church as an economic entity) of such divisions, along with the harsh nature of the disagreements that too often arise between Christian brothers and sisters are much more the issue at hand.
Danielle E.
I don’t think all the different denominations are a huge problem in themselves. Sometimes their interactions may be though. Different denominations should not compete with each other as they all should be trying to achieve the same goal: bringing people into the kingdom of God. The interactions should be that of loving brothers and sisters in Christ. As the Bible says we are to be know by our love for one another.
-Jeremiah
The church may not get along because it is inwardly focus. If we are focused on the wrong stuff, it creates a petri-dish for germinating dissent.
Also, on the issue of unity: I once read a question by AWTozer about Unity – Do all the pianos in the world have to be in the same room to be in tune? In other words, if a middle see is struck in Spokane, if it is a true C, it will sound the same in Rome. So, maybe the question needs to be, not so much whether we are unified, but what unifies us?
Something to think about.
I hear people saying that the church is too divided all the time; that the denominations don’t get along, and outsiders wonder how we can say we have the love of Jesus when we can’t even love each other. This is a completely valid point, and I definitely agree, and I’m glad you brought it up. However, the mentality presented in the book Missional Church was one of being sent out into the world to reach people there. It didn’t say anything about bringing them back to your church once you reached them. Church planters go out and plant new churches, and instead of returning to their original church afterward, they go and plant a new church in a new place. It’s hard to understand, but a missional church is one that is so incredibly different from the church we see today. Like Rob said, the focus is not at all on the buildings. It is on reaching as many people as possible with the Gospel of Christ. It’s not looked at in terms of “membership.” It’s more like a family that is always growing; a family that accepts all family members for who they are because they are family. And I think that is why its so difficult for us to grasp on to. We need to completely change the way we view our faith and the church. I’m not sure I have a complete grasp of the concept, but this is how I see it right now.
– Diana C.
Danielle, I remember Karin saying that! It’s so interesting to bring it up in this context, I’m so glad you did -very important thought. My question is, if Karin is right and we do need to work from the inside of the chruch.. what do we do with all the different cultures? With the 60% of Americans who arn’t attracted to this kind of church? Do we cross cultural boundaries first to win them and then make them cross boundaries to get to the chruch? How do we make one united chruch attract and relate to so many different kind of people? Could we have one big main church that all cultures come to for unity and some kind of small groups or little branch off churches that relate to each context? Interesting.. great point to bring up! -Emily L