I am admittedly fed up with the way that I have experienced Christian "dialogue" about inter and intra church issues. Sometimes (as is apparent from a particular recent post) I get so discouraged that I wonder why I'm even bothering entering the ministry. And then, of course, I remind myself that my ministry is to the church and to the world, and that offering the peace and hope of Christ to a world that desperately needs it is much more important than the way I feel about church conflict.
As long as I'm admitting things, I also have to admit that I recognize that I have developed in myself an unfair and biased view of so-called "evangelicals" - mostly in terms of ideology, but also in terms of presentation. In my own life experience, I have been hurt by "evangelicals" who have either presented themselves as closed-minded or judgmnental. I understand fully that there are certainly "evangelicals" that are warm, kind, and welcoming. It's hard, however, when the bad experiences stick out in my head. It means that I am left battling my preconceived notions of the way I expect this group to function. And I enjoy when I am pleasantly surprised! Such is the case today.
My latest discouragement has been my experience with a lack of true dialouge between the ELCA and LCMS (at least at the grassroots level, perhaps not at a higher church government level) about our differences, especially when speaking about open, closed, and joint communion. Both sides are trying to find more and more ways, Biblical and otherwise, to back up their position. At no point have I seen either side really trying to understand the other's position. Neither side has yet been willing to accept that the other's viewpoint might have some value, or to see what could be learned from each other. I'm guilty of this as well. I stopped trying to understand and started trying to appeal to unity in Christ as more important than doctrinal debates. I honestly do believe that the unity of the body of Christ is the most important goal of the church, but it's certainly a cop-out when I am in the midst of a different discussion!
I get the Christianity Today online newsletter. I read it every time it comes, often out of morbid curiosity. This morbid curiosity, of course, is in part stemmed from my own biases, and I often find myself reading the newsletter hoping that it fulfills my negative expectations. (Sidenote: Hm...as I write, I realize that CPE has totally done me in...I'm just so darn honest right now! And vulnerable! And willing to share!) I found it interesting and ironic when I read over the newsletter today and saw a link to an archived article entitled "Divided by Communion." I wasn't sure what I was going to find. Given the heated debate and lack of dialogue over communion that I experienced in the ELCA-LCMS (and I suppose that I, perhaps mistakenly, consider both denominations to be less conservative than the "evangelicals"), I expected that I would read an article that would mis-portray all of the adherents to "real presence," or an article that would otherwise come off as judgmental.
Instead, it ran down a short historical background for a number of major groups of thought on communion, and the author decided that no matter what evangelicals believe about communion, perhaps they should think more about the "what" and "why" of communion, giving credit to other denominations for their own theologies and emphases. I was blown away. Here's what I expected the ELCA and LCMS to be able to do. They didn't. And here, a group to which I often don't give enough credit has come through with not only a voice of reason, but also one of openness and dialogue.
I was looking for dialogue and a willingness to try on other people's viewpoints. I found it exactly where I didn't expect it.
This is humbling. And refreshing. There is hope for dialogue among Christians after all!
No comments:
Post a Comment