Multiple truth. Relative truth. Call it what you want, but it’s everywhere. “That may be true for you, but it’s not true for me” can be heard in most coffeehouses, break rooms, and student unions in Average City, USA. This endeavor to define truth in an age where truth has no definition has become one of the greatest challenges in my attempts to share my faith. Is it impossible? No. It does present significant obstacles, though, as well as a decent amount of confusion for anyone who is seriously trying to rethink their place in life. Where does this mindset of multiple truths come from? What perpetuates the desire to continue to find something that meets each of us individually rather than find the collective common ground and allow for some variation within the common mindset?
My answer, so far, is that the problem begins with us. It begins with Christians. People of the church who would rather go to the next corner and begin their own church rather than stay on this corner and work out the problems while holding to unity as a higher goal than an individual’s right to determine an individual interpretation of truth. After all, it is our interpretation of truth that drives us apart, isn’t it? I believe one thing is true and will separate from the group that believes differently. Isn’t this how the protestant church began? What we have lost along the way is Luther’s desire that he held until his last breath, that the church would once again be united. It was not his intention to begin another church. Separation was not his goal. There were problems that needed addressed, and he held his ground that they be addressed until he was kicked out. He unwillingly obliged with this action when he would not recant. This began a mindset that we have held to this day: we feel vindicated in splicing off of the body of Christ to begin our own work when we can label it as a desire for the ‘truth’. Unfortunately, it doesn’t even take something as large as truth to be our reason. Sometimes all we want is to ‘do church’ our own way; a way that is ‘more meaningful’ to me.
Can you blame the world for being in a place where truth has so many meanings that it has become meaningless when Christians, the ones to whom the truth of the One, Eternal God has been entrusted, cannot even agree on what truth is? We have allowed our individualism to become the driving force of what we seek rather than the truth of Christ, which is not only love, but unity. 1 Corinthians 8 talks strongly about this. There were those in Corinth who valued their own knowledge over the unity of the church as a whole. Paul was quick to tell them that their own freedom, however real and validated it may have been, was not to be exercised at the expense of the rest of the church’s spiritual welfare. The unity of the body of Christ was not to be sacrificed over personal freedoms.
This is not to say that problems don’t exist in the church, even in the theology of the church. But it is to say that when we lack unity, we lack the role in the world that Christ expects us to have. How is it possible to be the Body of Christ when we can’t even agree on what to call ourselves? One step further, how many of the people in the Presbyterian can tell you why they are different from the Methodists or the Lutherans or the Catholics or the (fill in whatever denomination you want)? The same is true of many of the non-denominational churches. I was raised non-denominational and I can tell you that I had no idea what separated us from anyone else, except that we knew the ‘truth’ that the others were missing. Whatever that was.
My stand is that the unity of the church should be valued over and above whatever disagreements we may have. The creeds of years gone by were an attempt to maintain the unity of the church while correcting heretical thought that tried to create disunity. We should maintain an openness to understand that our theology may need looked at as we understand more of what God is saying in our world. After all, I once heard it said that theology is not the truth, it is an attempt to protect the truth. I believe this to be correct. Our theology, our attempt to protect the truth, should not lead us to break apart the greatest asset God gave us, the Body of Christ. One truth; the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is the gospel message. Anyone who can agree with this truth should be our ally, friend, and brother/sister.
My answer, so far, is that the problem begins with us. It begins with Christians. People of the church who would rather go to the next corner and begin their own church rather than stay on this corner and work out the problems while holding to unity as a higher goal than an individual’s right to determine an individual interpretation of truth. After all, it is our interpretation of truth that drives us apart, isn’t it? I believe one thing is true and will separate from the group that believes differently. Isn’t this how the protestant church began? What we have lost along the way is Luther’s desire that he held until his last breath, that the church would once again be united. It was not his intention to begin another church. Separation was not his goal. There were problems that needed addressed, and he held his ground that they be addressed until he was kicked out. He unwillingly obliged with this action when he would not recant. This began a mindset that we have held to this day: we feel vindicated in splicing off of the body of Christ to begin our own work when we can label it as a desire for the ‘truth’. Unfortunately, it doesn’t even take something as large as truth to be our reason. Sometimes all we want is to ‘do church’ our own way; a way that is ‘more meaningful’ to me.
Can you blame the world for being in a place where truth has so many meanings that it has become meaningless when Christians, the ones to whom the truth of the One, Eternal God has been entrusted, cannot even agree on what truth is? We have allowed our individualism to become the driving force of what we seek rather than the truth of Christ, which is not only love, but unity. 1 Corinthians 8 talks strongly about this. There were those in Corinth who valued their own knowledge over the unity of the church as a whole. Paul was quick to tell them that their own freedom, however real and validated it may have been, was not to be exercised at the expense of the rest of the church’s spiritual welfare. The unity of the body of Christ was not to be sacrificed over personal freedoms.
This is not to say that problems don’t exist in the church, even in the theology of the church. But it is to say that when we lack unity, we lack the role in the world that Christ expects us to have. How is it possible to be the Body of Christ when we can’t even agree on what to call ourselves? One step further, how many of the people in the Presbyterian can tell you why they are different from the Methodists or the Lutherans or the Catholics or the (fill in whatever denomination you want)? The same is true of many of the non-denominational churches. I was raised non-denominational and I can tell you that I had no idea what separated us from anyone else, except that we knew the ‘truth’ that the others were missing. Whatever that was.
My stand is that the unity of the church should be valued over and above whatever disagreements we may have. The creeds of years gone by were an attempt to maintain the unity of the church while correcting heretical thought that tried to create disunity. We should maintain an openness to understand that our theology may need looked at as we understand more of what God is saying in our world. After all, I once heard it said that theology is not the truth, it is an attempt to protect the truth. I believe this to be correct. Our theology, our attempt to protect the truth, should not lead us to break apart the greatest asset God gave us, the Body of Christ. One truth; the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is the gospel message. Anyone who can agree with this truth should be our ally, friend, and brother/sister.
posted by Scott at 10:51 PM
