|
Opinions -
Editorials
|
|
Contributed by Clarke
|
|
Wednesday, 21 December 2005 |
|
Page 4 of 4
I could keep going. There are further splits in the one-cup
congregations over wine vs. grape juice, breaking the bread and
splitting it up vs. keeping it intact and passing around the loaf, over
beliefs on divorce, and even over unity and fellowship itself. Not to
mention splits over instrumental music, premillenialism and other
beliefs.
Most of these splits have occured because of the “Principle of
Silence.” Jesus prayed for unity. The apostles speak of unity in their
epistles. God does not want a divided church.
I understand that many of the things I have just written about are
convictions that are held by many, and to them are not just opinions.
So be it. However, we must not cut off our brothers and sisters in
Christ over issues of Silence.
We must not cut off our brothers in the Independent Christian Churches
because they hold a belief about instrumental music that is divergent
from our own. The non-class churches must not cut off us because we
hold a belief that having a Sunday school class is okay. We need to
accept the differences that each of us have, love one another as
brothers and sisters, have a true dialoge, and work to bring others to
Christ.
I believe that the principle of silence, while meant to bring us all
back to the pattern of the New Testament church, has created a major
problem for unity. When practiced to its extreme, it can create
division over very small issues, that honestly, to most, don’t really
matter. At the same time, the principal of silence is not without
merit. It has forced people to think about the scriptures, about
innovation, about what practices they feel are important.
So, do I wish to disregard the “principle of silence”? No, I do not.
However, we must teach our children, and our brothers and sisters in
Christ, that we must not divide the church over matters where the
principle of silence is the cause of a disagreement. I do not feel that
any of us could defend such a division standing in front of the Lord,
no matter where in the division we are. Instead of excluding those we
have an honest disgreement with, we must treat those brothers and
sisters with love and respect, and hope that they do the same to us.
-Clarke
Clarkecomments.com
Powered by Components Lab Tag Mambot
|
Milk and meat
Written by Alan on 2005-12-22 08:12:33
Hello Clarke,
Great thoughts, and extremely relevant.
It occurs to me that the scriptures are silent about drawing lines of fellowship over things like instrumental music, institutions, Sunday school classes, and the number of cups used to partake of communion. Shouldn't those who hold principle of silence be thereby restrained from drawing those lines?
The scriptures spell out a few scenarios where lines of fellowship must be drawn. (eg. 1 Cor 5:9-13; 2 John verses 7-11). There is a very short list of such explicit instructions. Do we have the right to extend that list using human reasoning rather than explicit instructions? Or is this what Jesus meant when he spoke of the weeds and the wheat, and the good and bad fish? Note that the bad fish remain with the good until sorted out by the angels at the end of the age.
Instead of drawing lines of fellowship, we should "gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance..." (2 Tim 2:25)
I am convinced that I am wrong about something in my biblical understanding. Obviously I don't know which things I am wrong about, or I wouldn't believe those things. Since my understanding is flawed, I need to extend grace to others whose understanding (in my opinion) is flawed. With the judgment I use, I will be judged.
Alan
| a key issue
Written by flobert on 2008-03-14 02:44:04
Thanks for this article. It seems to me to be very relevant; I have a CC and ICOC background, but have some connections with COC folks.
Even if Silence is a valid means of identifying methodology for the church (I'm not sure -- I'll remain silent for now), it might be wise to remember Jesus' attitude toward many of the rules, which often seemed to render the Pharisees red-faced. For instance, he justified bending the rules by picking grain on the Sabbath by saying that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (Mark 2). (I noticed, also, that he didn't argue the validity of the Pharisees' rule, he just put it into perspective -- is that significant?).
When our rules, however we get them, become more important than people, we have lost sight of Jesus' vision for his church. And this is a character flaw that perhaps none of us can claim to be completely without. Call it pride, call it unloving -- we could all stand to model some repentance.
Thanks. |
Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register. Powered by AkoComment 2.0!
|
|
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 10 January 2006 )
|
|
|
|
Opinions 
