Last Saturday evening, I performed a wedding and enjoyed a good reception for a few hours before I headed off to my early pre-Sunday morning worship bed time. Truth be told, I usually leave right when the dancing starts. My wife and my daughter stayed. They dance better than I do and they don’t have to get up and finish a sermon at 5 AM like I always do. But as I was leaving it struck me that most people don’t dance in couples anymore, it’s more like they dance in groups. Little small revolving circles of what my teenage daughter calls “friend groups.” All the people in the groups dancing with each other, all the while chatting away, laughing at their old jokes and telling old stories. It’s less about intimacy and more about involvement. And it doesn’t matter if you don’t have a date (or if your husband is a boring, dud pastor who goes to bed early). In your “friend group” you have a whole bunch of dance partners, who will all join you as part of a small subset of a larger dance, where everyone is listening to the same music and filling a much larger dance floor, both part of the whole and part of something smaller all at the same time.
For the better part of the last two months, I have been offering the observations that our Commission is making as we spread out across the country to talk to people about our church and its way of being church together. In these periodic posts, we have been inviting you all to come join us on a balcony where we look down on the dance floor that is the PCUSA to get a glimpse of what we are seeing and to help us try to interpret what we are hearing. I have a hunch that this post could end up being the most important one yet. It’s not so much about the ‘dancing’ as the “friend groups” of people who are moving about and talking together and revolving around each other in the larger dance. Consider this an observation, not so much about the dance itself, but the ongoing dance floor conversations about the dance.
Some of the conversations are passionate, even heated. Others are detached. Still others are just eager to stop talking focus on the missional dance of proclaiming and demonstrating the reign and will of God to a world in need. But even over the music, the din of voices can be heard and there is one common conversation amidst all the different “friend groups”. Consider this Observation #4:
We are in need of more practical theology on the unity of the Church and the diversity of churches.
Specifically we need to attempt answer these questions together:
- What does it mean to be a unified Church with a diversity of churches?
What structures express both unity and diversity faithfully and fruitfully? - How can we best organize ourselves so that our unity in Christ and the diversity of witness that is present in our congregations is most faithful and most fruitful for witnessing to the God who is Three-in-One?
For this post, I want to save my own opinions and instead offer you a chance to listen in on the conversations of others. You will hear some interesting and creative thinking about the way we manage the polarities and deal with the competing values of trying to affirm our unity and oneness in Christ while acknowledging that there is a growing diversity of opinion on positions that are deeply held and passionately argued. Indeed, some of our “friend groups” were formed because of these positions.
For some, this ongoing conversation IS the work of the church, seeing our mission as maybe even fundamentally engaging in a raucous but respectful conversation about theological matters (the BBC broadcasts of British parliament debates come to mind). For others, this conversation is the greatest hindrance to the mission itself, frustrating those who feel as if we keep interrupting the dance for discussion.
The issues are around missional purpose, community and covenant, theological affinity and geography. Indeed, almost every experimental model that is working its way through the system at the moment is trying as creatively and faithfully as possible to ask: Within a larger unity in Christ, is it possible to find alignments where those who share more theological similarities could be joined together for the sake of our mission? Are there some ways of being that will allow different groups to function as faithful differentiated missional entities within a larger shared unity of faith? Are there models from the past or other Christian traditions that are helpful here? Are their fruitful possibilities that we haven't considered yet?
What would be gained if we did? What could we lose? Are there unintended consequences we can avoid? Are there unrecognized possibilities that we can’t yet imagine?
And a recurring question that needs to be explored with lots of depth, wisdom and patience (not to mention creativity, imagination, and love): In a world where communication and connection is facilitated by technology, where “tribes” can affiliate and organize, connect and relate even across the globe, what is the theological rationale for structuring geographically?
In every case clear, GOOD, healthy, faithful and COMPETING values are at stake. Certainly, there are mistakes that could be made; unhelpful, even damaging choices, that should be avoided. At the same time, fear of doing something wrong could keep us from doing something new that might genuinely engage our witness.
Perhaps most heartening, this conversation is engaging some sharp theological minds even in deep disagreement. So, let me encourage you (like our General Assembly Moderator before me) to look in (listen in?) on these conversations, add your own voice to them and take up the conversation on the dance floor. Hopefully you’ll consider a new dance partner from another friend group than those you usually hang out with. Maybe you’ll discover something you have in common (like that for all our diversity we are all dancing to the same song!). Who knows? Maybe you’ll bring a few new steps back to your own group and the whole dance will take on a new fresh energy.
- Two articles from Barry Ensign-George about the unity of the faith and what exactly we are talking about when we talk “denominations.”
- A theological critique of the Fellowship PCUSA White Paper that asks us to consider if we suffer from a deficient Christology. Meanwhile the Fellowship itself has offered up some “markers” for a way forward. (Leslie Scanlon of the Outlook has an analysis)
- San Diego Executive Presbyter Clark Cowden uses the metaphor of the NCAA and it’s various and ever evolving leagues to ask whether geographical regions have outlived their usefulness (a question raised by the Fellowship PCUSA, too) and that maybe realignment around theological affinity has something to offer within a larger expression of unity.
- At the same time, John Vest (an MGB Commissioner) calls the church to a greater urgency for church planting while he also questions the conviction of our New Church Planters that there need be some clear theological agreement to form healthy churches (and questions whether the Council in Acts 15 got it wrong in the first place). While Vice-Moderator Landon Whitsett offers his concerns about too much emphasis on “like-mindedness” as well.
(Please add any other posts, articles or discussions on this theme to the comments and if you are interested in the first five Observations, you will find them starting from the beginning here.)
Recent Comments