I am taking a break from my series, "Becoming Unchurched," in order to give some attention to the Christian Affirmation created and signed by 23 leaders of the Churches of Christ. PLease read it before you read this post in order for this post to make sense.
For those of you who read this blog and are not in the Church of Christ, then this might seem a bit like trivia - because if it didn't mean so much to the people involved, it would be. Yes, this is pulling a bit of lint from the navel, but here we go.
I have constructed 5 questions for the 23 signers of the document (which appeared in the Christian Chronicle and has its own website). I sent these questions to the e-mail address they have asked comminications to be sent through.
The 5 questions are as follows:
1. Why make such a public statement (Christian Chronicle, website), but then extremely limit who is even invited into the conversation? (Will transcripts of these conversations be made available to rest of us who are not invited?)
2. If people do not adopt these 3 points as they are made in the Christian Affirmation are they in danger of Hell fire? If not, then why the fuss?
3. Is the Christian Affirmation an attempt to bring Christian unity?
4. Why elevate acappella worship to the theological level of baptism and communion when the Bible does not?
5. Is the Christian Affirmation meant to affirm Christianity, The Church of Christ as a fellowship, or to declare the Church of Christ as a fellowship comprises all of Christianity or is there some other intent?
12 comments:
Chris,
Jeff Peterson, one of the signers posted a response on my blog about this. He is apparently from Austin Theological. Which is the only real link on the website. I assume by this and the number of people from there that they orginated the document. Lots could be said, but the most common response I have heard is ???what is this? Why did they write it? Why is it published here?
When I Googled "Christian Affirmation" I came up with this site as the #1 response: http://www.umc.org/interior.asp?mid=1808
It's from the UMC, and I found I could sign this one! The major statements are:
1. We hold in common with all Christians a faith in the mystery of salvation in and through Jesus Christ.
2. We share the Christian belief that God's redemptive love is realized in human life by the activity of the Holy Spirit, both in personal experience and in the community of believers.
3. We understand ourselves to be part of Christ's universal church when by adoration, proclamation, and service we become conformed to Christ.
4. With other Christians we recognize that the reign of God is both a present and future reality.
5. We share with many Christian communions a recognition of the authority of Scripture in matters of faith, the confession that our justification as sinners is by grace through faith, and the sober realization that the church is in need of continual reformation and renewal.
I know several of the peoplewho signed this and have heard several more. When I saw the some of them signed this, I was shocked. I just don't think they really believe what they put forth here.
Do you know why they even came up with this?
Could it be a control thing? The "church of Christ" has become very different things for different people--and perhaps they want to bring us back to a meeting of the minds?
Of course, I am a woman. I can't be a minister or elder in the church of Christ, so can I have any opinion at all?
I am a "unity" person--but this document does not give me warm fuzzies!
Blessings!
JB
I wondered earlier today why God has led me continually to Ephesians 4 over the weekend. I had forgotten about this discussion but suddenly I know why I was drawn to this wonderful chapter.
I would add a 6th question:
How is this document fulfilling the command to Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace?
Very good questions asked here, I am looking forward to the follow up answers if and when they are answered.
I have a mixed reaction to this document. What I don't like about it is that it is very creed like. If we believe to speak where the bible speaks and be silent where the bible is silent, then let's not make up a creed. The bible is our only creed.
Unfortunately, I don't see eye to eye with you on this. The sentiment to hold on to clear biblical teachings (Baptism, Lord's Supper) is noble. God has linked salvation and baptism. Who are any of us to separate them? We cannot preach Acts 2:38 and then say that those who aren't baptized are still Christians. It doesn't work. It leaves us with "sons of God through faith" who are not "clothed with Christ through baptism." Surely God is the judge and if he wants to save those who aren't baptized, that's His perogative. But we must teach what the bible says. Lastly, this document is written in quite a loving spirit. Agree or disagree with its contents, it is written in love. At least that's how I see it. God bless.
Just because this document included no name-calling and didn't outright condemn anyone to hell...doesn't mean it was written in love. It was written in a relatively friendly manner, yes...but depending on its intent and underlying message, it could easily fall into the unloving catagory.
When the Pharisees stood up for their traditions, Jesus took issue with them.
He really got ticked off the more those traditions were defended to the neglect of teh Kingdom fo God, or when they were equated with the Kingdom of God.
I don't think that this is mean spiriuted, but what is the point of preserving a denomination?
But can we really judge the hearts of the signers and assume they have the same motivations as the Pharisees? To be honest, I've seen far knee-jerk judgmentalism to the affirmation than I can see in the affirmation itself. Why is that?
James, I have been one of the biggest critics in the blog world. I know there are tons of conversations out there going on over e-mail and face to face eyt.
I have to say that what got me so turned off by it was not so much the content, which is completely unshocking, but rather the context from which it came and the process by which it is coming.
I have to confess that I am a little more senstive than I need to be about this because in the end it really makes no difference in my life. I guess I want my leaders not to lead like that. If they are going to take the effort to do something, to assert their leadership, then why not do something along the lines of social justice, service, blessing the world?
Sorry to post this instead of emailing you, but I couldn't find an email address on your blog. I have stumbled across several blogs by twenty-somethings in Churches of Christ. I think some of the comments about our tradition, colleges, etc., are a valuable part of a conversation that is going on in our generation about what to do with the church in which we were raised. Below is a link to a blog I just started as an attempt to join the conversation (albeit with a much different angle):
http://www.gayrestorationist.blogspot.com
Anyway, feel free to delete this post if you'd like (it may be a liability to link to a gay blog); I just wanted to let you know my blog was out there in case you ever want to drop in and comment.
I wondered earlier today why God has led me continually to Ephesians 4 over the weekend. I had forgotten about this discussion but suddenly I know why I was drawn to this wonderful chapter.
I would add a 6th question:
How is this document fulfilling the command to Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace?
Post a Comment