The name calling and rhetoric among differing "camps" in the Church seems to be screaming out at an all-time high. And it's really begun to hurt my ears. Christians calling names and labeling other Christians needs to stop - unless, of course, we're calling each other Brother or Sister. I'm not talking about ugly names that we teach our kids not to use. Nope, I'm referring to the nasty, devisive words that we freely use in front of our children as we condemn those that we ought to be teaching them to unite with. How often do we use and hear these four words (each paired together): progresive and traditional, liberal and conservative?
When it comes to these words, Christians have done more redefining than Webster himself. We've used 'our' definitions of these names to categorize and group ourselves and then to throw rocks at everyone who wasn't invited into our group. It really needs to stop. Every day, I live with the guilt of knowing that I spent years with my head down looking for the next rock to hurl instead of looking up, searching for my brother to serve. I've asked God to forgive me. After God, I owe more people apologies than I could ever name in a lifetime.
For me, the irony is overwhelming. Not only in terms of my own guilt, but because I have been called both a liberal and an ultra-conservative. How is that possible? Only because of the inherent fallacy of the name calling. The truth is, I have spent most of my life being taught to be a conservative and doing my best to live out my training. So, I'm really not shocked that I have been described as an ultra-conservative. But when a friend told me that I was thought of as liberal and the congregation where my wife and I had just placed membership would not allow me to teach Bible classes, I was devastated; and I gave Satan the foothold I knew to avoid. The fact is, I was called an ultra-conservative because of my narrow-minded views and judgemental attitude. I was 'marked' as a liberal only because I went to Harding University. I suppose I should have gone to Freed-Hardeman. Although, I suppose that for those Christians, the Memphis School of Preaching would have been even better.
Enough of the rambling monologue. No more bloviating. Here's why I have changed my thoughts, and why I hope that you will consider doing the same.
Here's how I define those terms. Perhaps, this will help you to arrive at your own defintion or increase your personal understand of how you have been thinking. The idea of being 'traditional' cannotes the idea of sticking to traditions. For example, the congregation where I worship and serve has a tradition of assembling twice on Sunday. We're traditional in that sense. Whereas, another congregation chooses to meet only in the morning for worship and Bible study then chooses to meet in smaller groups that evening. That congregation would be thought of as progressive because of they have progressed forward away from the tradition of meeting twice on Sunday. Coincidentally, that congregation would also probably be attacked with large rocks and called liberal for that decision. But that's another discussion.
Conservative and liberal is considerably more abstract and relative, which makes them harder to define with consistency and accuracy. This is also one of the primary agruments I have against using these terms in any capacity as it relates to characterizing Christians or specific congregations. To you, I might be liberal. But to another person I am a rigid and conservative idealogue. For example, the fact that I have absolutely no problem with a praise team being used to amplify worship would make me a liberal to some of my brothers and sisters in the area where I live. However, because I am not comfortable with a praise team (including women) being in front of the assembly, many other folks whom I love dearly would think of me as a conservative. So where is the baseline? How do I know if I am right to label myself or someone else one way or another. You don't and you can't. There will always be someone more or less liberal than you. As well, there will always be someone more or less conservative than you.
This leads to the biggest issue I have with these names; and why I am so tired of hearing them. THEY ARE NOT BIBLICAL NAMES. I am proud to be affliated with the Restoration Movement (though I could hardly classify it as a movement these days). One self-defining term of the restoration plea is calling Bible things by Bible names. I'm not sure if that holds any authority with you or not. But I find it terribly ironic that many who hold to that creed also hold dearly to the idea that conservative is right and liberal is wrong. None of these four words (progressive, traditional, conservative, liberal) were ever uttered from the mouth of our Lord, nor those that He commisioned to begin and grow His Church. Why on earth would I then do it?!
Instead of approaching conflict and differences of opinion by hurling rocks across the arbitrary line that we have drawn, let's step across the line and take our brothers by the hand and love each other. We're not always going to agree. And on some issues, someone is going to end wrong. But instead of taking on the role of judge and executioner with each, let's reserve those roles for the one person who earned them. Instead, why don't you and I focus on loving as best we can, and teaching as best we know how.
but what will i do with all these rocks in my pockets?!
ReplyDeletehey schopper. you do have a great point. the most important thing is to love people as best you can. i've always pondered the thought mentioned...not necessarily the calling of names & categories, but the delicate balance of politics & my Christianity. when or if it is appropriate to discuss them together. the subjects tend to overlap in some ways like when the government tries to regulate things that affect your Christian values like abortion & gay rights. when the name calling starts, it does separate and breed resentment. but i wonder, do you just love and keep silent. lately i've struggled with that.u want to focus on saving a soul, but at the same time, u r trying to preserve your freedoms in even serving God...freely. And u try to warn others that their freedom to worship God is in danger. u probably recall problems with the govt. in the new test. part of the reason Jesus was crucified is that the rulers feared he would cause an uprising from the people, perhaps they would lose their high positions. then we have in the old test. the people demanded a king. God gave into their request, but regulated what kind of king it should be. the Israelites disobeyed God and eventually took on an evil king...much to their downfall (as we have now). we have a duty to save souls. i think we also have a duty to warn and preserve some sense of God in this place...but lovingly like u said. i need to practice on that. most importantly, find the delicate balance, know when and where to say what. by the way, i need to work on my loving skills these days.
ReplyDelete