Reflections on Unity

“I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.” 1 Corinthians 1:10-17

Coming to Christ is unquestionably the most wonderful event in my life. Being a young introvert who struggled with depression and self-image, the reality of the Son of God humbling Himself in order to rescue His wayward people transformed my entire perception of reality. Sin is defeated! Life had purpose! But one of the most powerful shifts in my perspective was that I was no longer an isolated individual; I became a part of something much greater than myself.

My first experience of Christianity was in a small town Southern Baptist church in Southeast Missouri, where I realized the truth and beauty of Christianity at the age of 15. The people there were, for the most part, wonderfully friendly and taught me valuable lessons on what it meant to love one’s neighbor. I will always remember my first visit to the youth group of the church when, as soon as we greeted one another in the Lord, someone climbed over the row of chairs behind me and gave me a massive hug. While an extremely awkward introduction, that was the moment I realized I was in the right place. That church was faithfully committed to teaching Scripture and vehement defenders of it. But many complications arose in the congregation and the church was split right down the middle, the two sides parting ways bitterly. I’m sure that many believed it was best for the two sides to separate into different churches and minister to their particular groups. Sadly, the ministries in both churches suffered greatly, and the two were never as effective as when they were as one. And to this day, many still bear those harsh feelings against the other side.

The tragedy that befell that church has continued to disturb me even a full decade after the fact. With all the division in the world already, why are the people of God contributing to it, especially for such a reason as “I don’t like this style of music/liturgy/speaking”? And worse, when the Lord says things like “By this all people will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35), and we refuse to reach out to one another because “Well, they’re the ones at fault!”, are we really loving one another as the Lord commanded us? Paul tells the Colossian church this powerful—and applicable—piece of wisdom:

Put on then, as God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassionate hearts, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience, bearing with one another and, if one has a complaint against another, forgiving each other; as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive. And above all these put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony. And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in one body. And be thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God. (Colossians 3:12-16)

Unity is a critical aspect of the Christian life, and we can see its importance throughout the whole of theology. In both the intellectual and practical field, this concept has enormous reach, to the point that it would be quite impossible to explain everything in a single article; far greater authors have written volumes on this subject. Instead, I want to take one particular topic and show what unity—particularly ecclesial and ecumenical unity—reveals in it. Let us look at the nature of unity in salvation

Paul gives us an excellent overview of what salvation means in Romans 6, as he admonishes them for thinking that they could continue living in sin after they are saved:

For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. For one who has died has been set free from sin. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God.  (Romans 6:5-10)

When we are baptized, we are joined with the death of Christ in order that we may be joined as well in His resurrection; what an amazing truth! Sin is not merely an unruly child’s outbursts of disobedience; it is a corruption and disease that must be annihilated. And through Jesus Christ’s incarnation and intervention, His light delivers the death blow against the darkness. With that, let’s discuss something that is easily missed: we are united with Him in death to be united with Him in resurrection.

What does it mean to be united in Christ’s death? Christ’s death functions as the atoning sacrifice necessary for the removal of sin. For our purposes, it gives an intriguing picture: “For the death He died He died to sin, once for all, but the life He lives He lives for God.” (v. 10) Jesus did not die for each of us individually, but for all His people collectively. This is an element of His identity as the “Second Adam” and the Representative of the covenant between God and man. This is detailed by Paul in two places:

Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. (Romans 5:18-19)

Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. (1 Corinthians 15:45)

As covenant representative, Jesus’ righteous life and sacrifice impacts all of creation, just as Adam’s sin had corrupted it.1  And His actions work towards restoring the communion that was broken with the Fall, both between God and man and man and man. The unifying force of Christ’s incarnation fulfills the covenant that had been established by God throughout the history of His people, and in Him all nations are truly blessed as Abraham was promised over a thousand years prior.2  Our gender doesn’t matter. Our race doesn’t matter. Our upbringing doesn’t matter. All are invited into the community, and all come to Jesus on equal ground. And as we are united with Jesus in His death and through the sacraments of baptism and Eucharist, we are bound up into the identity of one another. Just as Paul calls the Corinthians to be, we become of one mind and heart, never seeking conflict with our brothers but rather reconciliation, peace, and communion.

T.F. Torrance has this to say about the work of Christ:

In the heart of that creation, God created man, made in the union of male and female as one flesh, to reflect the image of God within their relation of union with God. But that union between man and God was sundered… But the eternal purpose of God remained, and so at last in Jesus Christ… the mystery of God’s will became incarnate. It embodied itself in the midst of our humanity, begetting Jesus Christ the one in whom all mankind is gathered back into communion with God. By the atonement in the God-Man, through atonement and communion or koinōnia in him, humanity is restored to the lost relation with God, restored in Christ to union with God. The church is the sphere of koinōnia in history, Christ’s own body where that mystery of the kingdom is proclaimed, revealed and actualised, and there is created a new humanity through participation in Jesus Christ the first-born among many brethren, the first-born of all creation.3

This koinōnia—or “fellowship”—is a primary purpose of the Church in the world. Through peace, love, faithfulness, mercy, and community, we work towards piercing the veil and bringing the kingdom of God into this world. Think of the Incarnation and the Cross as an IV, puncturing through the divide between God and man while holiness and grace pour through. The Church works much like the treated blood, accepting the medicine and transferring it all throughout the body. But if the treated blood began to work against itself, it would lead to terrible complications in the body. It takes everything working together for the body to quickly be rid of its infection. In doing this, the unity of the Church works as a powerful witness for the world and even ancient wounds can be mended.

You have likely noticed that I am strongly convinced, through all my studies, that the unity of the Church, particularly in regards to ecumenical unity, is vitally important for the Church’s proper function. Scripture and church history clearly call for us to be of one heart and mind as the one people of God.4 I have met so many people who have rejected or departed from Christianity because of Christian pride and dissension, and I hate the fact that I cannot entirely dismiss their accusations, as these are serious issues that genuinely happen in our communities and must be answered. Every time I hear a new case of division because of issues like worship style or carpet color, I am reminded powerfully of a passage in Irenaeus’ Against Heresies:

He shall also judge those who give rise to schisms, who are destitute of the love of God, and who look to their own special advantage rather than to the unity of the Church; and who for trifling reasons, or any kind of reason which occurs to them, cut in pieces and divide the great and glorious body of Christ, and so far as in them lies, [positively] destroy it—men who prate of peace while they give rise to war, and do in truth strain out a gnat, but swallow a camel. For no reformation of so great importance can be effected by them, as will compensate for the mischief arising from their schism.5

We cannot deny the massive repercussions of schism on the Church today. But what can be done about it now? It is all too easy to believe that there is no hope for a perfectly unified Church now that we have separated into so many denominations. And I must admit, the same unity that shaped the Church 1500 years ago is unlikely to return for a while. But this does not mean that we should give up. So how can we work to mend the broken bonds between us? But the real question should be: don’t we already know how to mend these bonds? “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.” (Galatians 5:22-23) “You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbor, lest you incur sin because of him.” (Leviticus 19:17) “So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.” (Matthew 5:23-24) Love and reconciliation—the tools Christ Himself has given us—are our equipment to repair the divide. The first step is dialogues between local churches and realizing how the Lord is using each of us in our own contexts. Do any of us reject the Scriptures? The nature and reality of the Triune God? The Nicene Creed? Affirmation of our common faith opens the door to discussing the real points of conflict, and gives us a method to defeat them. With dialogue comes understanding, with understanding concurrence, with concurrence acknowledgment, and with acknowledgment peace. And with peace, the chains of discord and hatred can be broken, opening the way to the healing peace of the Lord. Is this not what we should strive for in all things, not the least our relationship with fellow believers?

I rejoice at hearing of the efforts of Christian leaders of all traditions throughout the world who are reaching out to one another and continuing ecumenical dialogue. And when I heard that one of my personal Christian heroes, T.F. Torrance, was a champion of ecumenical dialogues and pursued this very avenue of discussion.   But I am equally saddened by those who continue the cycle of dissension and brush off any attempt to reconcile. I pray for the day when all believers of all traditions can come and share the same Eucharist, just as the Lord intended. This is not to say that it is an easy road by any stretch of the imagination. I know there are many critical issues that need to be talked through. But that is precisely what I call for us to do: to talk about these things, that we may be reconciled to one another and once again bring peace to the body of Christ.


[wpex more=”View Sources” less=”Hide Sources”]
(1) Cf. Genesis 3
(2) Cf. Genesis 12:1-3
(3) Thomas F. Torrance, Incarnation: The Person and Life of Christ, ed. Robert T. Walker (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2008), 165-166
(4) Cf. 1 Corinthians 12:12-31, just to reference one.
(5) St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, as translated in: Schaff, Phillip, Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.vi.xxxiv.html
[/wpex]

Comments

18 responses to “Reflections on Unity”

  1. Kenneth O'Shaughnessy Avatar
    Kenneth O’Shaughnessy

    While attending a Reformed Baptist church in Georgia, I came to understand the importance of the communion of saints and the unity of the Church in Christ. Suffice it to say that I am now Eastern Orthodox 🙂

    1. Mark Green Avatar
      Mark Green

      Haha, I can understand that. I pray that God can use me on this side of the fence so that we may return to the unity so cherished by those who came before!

  2. Greg Herr Avatar
    Greg Herr

    Wonderfully. winsomely written piece!

    The way I think about unity is, as you allude to, in marriage. Husband and Wife evangelize their children profoundly by being an observable, intact unit (See the almost mathematical ‘if-then formula’ the Lord presents in John 17), something the children can touch, see, experience, and therefore replicate. So it is with the Church.

    A real, incarnate unity is tangibly observed; an invisible unity is observed in the realm of minds or ideas.

    A way to imagine this is if Husband lives in California, and Wife lives in New York; as compared to Husband and Wife living together in a lovely little home in Boise. What children will observe is an “idea of unity” (perhaps) in the former, and an incarnate, real unity in the latter. The former is compromised unity without integrity and is dis-integrated; the latter coheres and is integrated.

    “We cannot deny the massive repercussions of schism on the Church today. But what can be done about it now?” Anglicanorum Coetibus is available and implemented. Our Catholic parish is comprised of Uber Calvinists, Lutherans, Orthodox, Presbyterians, Evangelicals, Episcopalians, Anglicans, Baptists, Methodists, Brethren, and more.

    Blessings, and Ut Unum Sint.

    1. Mark Green Avatar
      Mark Green

      Thank you, Greg!

      It’s amazing how many things in Scripture revolve around the notion of our covenant with God. In a way, the Church United is meant to be the ultimate evidence for the Triune God: a people who live incarnationally and continue to seek to reflect the unity of God in themselves. I agree that the ‘idea of unity’ is far too prevalent within (mostly) Protestant circles. I’ve been to Baptist churches that refer to “those Methodists,” Reformed Baptists who say “those Catholics,” and so on while still saying “Well, we’re all Christians!” Much of what I sought in writing this was to counter that false sense of unity that so often is considered the “default mode” of Christian thought; even non-believers know better than to accept such a view of unity. So we as the people of God should be the first to seek reconciliation.

      I pray the spouses reconcile with one another, and return to the oneness they were designed for.

      Ut Unum Sint, my friend.

      1. Greg Herr Avatar
        Greg Herr

        Mark,

        Do you think we could irenically ‘press’ on this more (and yet remain humble and winsome!)? Could we offer to ???????? something?

        We’ve had ecumenical prayers and gatherings, we’ve stood side-by-side at abortion clinics, we’ve labored to present cogent Christian orthodoxy(ies), and even observed the 20-year anniversary of ECT. And all of these are to the good, and we might even suggest that a kind of greater unity, comradeship, and fraternity exists.

        Yet, as Peter Leithart said last week, “Even on basic doctrines of Protestantism, there are variations.” –Peter Leithart, FT, 10-13-16. I note the word “basic.” And I note it—I dearly wish to be honest and kind, both—as a result of the Reformation. If, despite it all, however much we might appreciate the Reformers and all they did, can we not assent that fragmentation was the result, and for whatever profound problems Rome had, or has, She remained intact, like a (dysfunctional) family?

        No ???????????????????????????? solution exists, and our convictions about the Faith are held dear to our minds and hearts, and not to be simply handed up against Conscience.

        But Rome ???????????? implement a concrete bridge for folks to walk across, and some had to dive deep into their Conscience to ???????????????? it to favor an incarnated act of restored Unity, and had to do that in some profoundly difficult ways, almost “against” itself.

        Could you offer steps and a plan that you, as my brother in Christ, will take and implement?

        Forgive me for putting you on the spot, but it seems like 500 years of separation is enough. Continued blessings.

      2. Mark Green Avatar
        Mark Green

        Oh man, those are massive questions… I’ll do my best to be succinct, while maintaining your kindness and respect.

        The Reformation era was actually a deep, deep web of intrigue, both theologically and politically, and I think that the permanence of the Schism between us was a result of what happened during that time: the 1500s were right smack dab in the middle of the Renaissance, the Gutenberg Printing Press made Bibles easily accessible to all peoples, corruption was indeed present in at least some of the clergy (the extent of which is a debatable topic), indulgences were as much of a problem then as televangelists are now, some kings were seeking to separate from papal authority, Jan Hus and others were burnt at the stake for calling for reform and became martyrs for the Reformation, Luther especially felt scandalized by his condemnation and betrayed by Pope Leo X’s endorsement of indulgences, and the late 1500’s are laden with terrible massacres and conflicts between Catholics and Protestants.

        Now, as for the differences in basic doctrines, I agree wholeheartedly that it is a problem. Sadly, when Protestants departed from the Catholic Church, there was little in the way of authoritative control of ideas. So when exposed to cultural revolutions such as the Renaissance, Romanticism, Modernism, and Postmodernism, they are swept along in the tide. I don’t think Reformers like Luther and Calvin bear sole responsibility for the tragic destabilization we see today. load. The biggest contributor, in my opinion, was the rampant growth of individualism in Western culture. Catholicism had hierarchical systems in place to at least keep this in check. But many Protestants, in their efforts to distance themselves as much as possible from their former home, distanced themselves from liturgy, Patristics, and the respect of the priesthood (thus the movement of pastors dressing just as the lay people do so as to emphasize equality with them); all three being the greatest weapons against individualistic ideals that lead to more schisms. And that is where we are today.

        I do respect the efforts put in place by Catholics to bridge the gap; I love reading the stories of ecumenical dialogue where the Pope visits the Patriarch of Constantinople or the Lutheran Synod. But many Protestant churches are structured very differently from Catholic churches. Whereas the final authority of a Catholic Church lies with its clergy, most Protestant churches reach consensus on these major ideas through town hall votes. So even if the pastor and elders are on board, the congregation could outright refuse, and could even throw out the pastor because of it. I would encourage any Catholic or Eastern Orthodox member, clergy or layperson, to be active in opening dialogue on the local level.

        Now, you asked me to offer steps for a plan that I will implement, and I think you’ve waded through enough words to get there. So my plan could be reflected in this question: how do you get a divorced couple to remarry? This question is vitally important for two reasons: it highlights the difficulty and mutual suffering that must take place. It’s easy for one side to say “Well, I’d be happy to remarry if that means that you agree with everything I say and apologize for all of those terrible things that happened in the past.” But would the other side really appreciate that? Certainly not, because they felt betrayed and wronged too! So we start small.

        I am, sadly, not in a major position of authority by any stretch of the imagination, the tiniest of blips on a saturated radar screen. However, what I have sought to do even in my low place is threefold:
        1) Engage in dialogue with Catholics – There was a wonderful older gentleman working at a BP gas station that I frequented, and we often talked about this topic. We were very cordial with one another before he retired. These situations need to happen more often. Were I a senior pastor or priest, I would engage in dialogue with whatever local Catholic parish and attempt to create events that bring our congregants together and build camaraderie.
        2) Educating Protestants in Patristic theology – We need it badly, and it’s actually quite fascinating to see that Reformed and Catholic theologies are actually not that terribly different in most fields. One of the tenets of the Reformed faith, “Sola Scriptura,” is often falsely used to say that only Scripture should be read, when what we actually say is that Scripture alone is the foundation of our belief and that other books must be observed through the lens of Scripture.
        3) Combat Individualism – This is not to say that full-blown communalism is the way to go either (the Tyranny of the Village, I believe the possible result is called). But with the rise of modernism and postmodernism, we are constantly seeing the damage it is causing to the Church.

        This took so long to write, haha… I apologize for the wall of text. I think the issue we are having is that our leaderships keep making ecumenical statements and having ecumenical dialogues while the local churches remain uninvolved with the process. Efforts will be infinitely strengthened through joining hands on the local level, not just for special events, but in our daily lives. Make an ecumenical Bible study! Create an ecumenical group that picks up trash around the area! To make our greater dialogues effective, we must become ecumenical at the basest level and work up.

        I hope that this was helpful! It is a major passion of mine that we can work towards lasting unity in the coming years!

        Blessings to you

      3. Greg Herr Avatar
        Greg Herr

        Enormous thanks for taking that on, and the divorce analogy is apt (I am, and not remarried to the first wife).

        So glad to hear you have taken those critical steps, and are willing to recommend more.

        Count me in! I’m a founding/board member of the previously mentioned, new Catholic parish, a convert myself, along with my wife and most of the members of the parish, so you can sense my passion. 🙂 It’s what gets me up in the morning.

        Thanks again.

        In Christ the Lord,

        Greg

  3. Tyler Tankersley Avatar
    Tyler Tankersley

    What a wonderful series of reflections, Mark. I too continue to dwell on the split that divided our wonderful church those many years ago. I remember you joining our youth group and the amazing, unified spirit that we had for a sweet season. Perhaps a silver living that can be gleaned from the pain of that church split is that people like you are now so committed to maintaining Christian unity.

    Peace to you, brother. Please let me know the next time you are in southeast Missouri. 🙂

    1. Mark Green Avatar
      Mark Green

      Thank you, brother. It’s been too long since we’ve been able to have a good conversation. I’ll be sure to let you know when I’m in the area!

  4. George Aldhizer Avatar
    George Aldhizer

    Hi Mark, really appreciated your article, I especially resonated with your reflections on covenant! Looking forward to having your voice here on the website. If I can ask you a difficult question from the get go, what drew you to the CRC (or perhaps the Reformed tradition in general) and what keeps you within that stream of Christianity?

    A brief bit from my background, and why I’m asking this question, I believe I converted to the Reformed faith in college (in the PCA more particularly), and am now sorta in a wrestling phase as to how much of the Reformed tradition I should bind myself to.

    1. Mark Green Avatar
      Mark Green

      Thank you, sir! I look forward to the great dialogues we’ll all be able to share!

      Edit: Apologies for the long response… Gonna have to work on that.

      As for how I came into the Reformed tradition, it’s a bit of a roller coaster, haha. I grew up non-Christian, and when I first came to the faith at 15, I spent a few years at a Southern Baptist Church. But I felt like there was far more history that I was sorely missing out on. Even in college, it felt as though there was a void of empty history from the late 1st century all the way to the mid-17th. And when I heard about Calvinism, it did not resonate very well with me in many ways: predestination and election were foreign to me, and some college student interpretations were spurious at best, leaning heavily into hyper-Calvinism. It wasn’t really until I went to Covenant Seminary that I got a solid grasp on the motivation of the original Reformers, and probably the linchpin that convinced me to accept Reformed faith is covenant theology, the declaration that God has been working in the world through the covenants in Scripture since the beginning–not changing any of His plans because of unforeseen circumstances–in order to bring the world to true restoration in Christ. Books like “Far as the Curse is Found” by Michael Williams, “Creation Regained” by Albert Wolters, and “The Mission of God” by Christopher Wright were amazing books that really helped put the pieces together. However, by far the most influential writer in my theological study has been Thomas F. Torrance, who masterfully weaves Reformed, Patristic, and scientific into a beautiful tapestry that reveals the inter-connectedness of nature, theology, ontology, Incarnation, etc. And in studying Torrance, I saw something amazing in his ecumenical work with Georges Florovsky, the great Orthodox theologian. All these things showed me that the Reformed faith is not just the “5 Points of Calvinism” or “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” It is “Far as the Curse Is Found,” “Creation Regained,” “Divine and Contingent Order,” “You Are What You Love,” and a potential bridge for real and intentional dialogue between Protestants and our ancient brethren.

      I will say, though, that one of the major flaws of the modern Reformation that I’ve seen is the strong inclination to eschew anything historically attributed to Catholicism such as Patristics, liturgy, etc. Pride in our own tradition is a major roadblock in efforts to extend our hand. I feel like the over-emphasis on adherence to Reformed catechisms like the Westminster and Heidelberg–though highly useful for study and summation of the Reformed faith–runs the risk of prioritizing them over Scripture, which many churches sadly do, albeit subconsciously. But one of my seminary professors commented that he takes no exceptions to the Westminster Confession, and it’s not because he agrees with everything in it; rather, “It shouldn’t be treated as an authoritative document, similar to Scripture, but rather as a historical aid,” which the Westminster actually encourages its readers to do. Also, while most Reformed traditions will call us to be more than “brains-on-sticks,” we Reformed people are perhaps the most susceptible to staying in the intellectual sphere without expressing that theology in our lifestyle. But when we stop thinking of ourselves as brains-on-sticks and start living out the faith, the Reformed faith is a powerful tool, and not nearly as severed from historical Christianity as it would seem.

      I came to the CRC primarily due to happenstance, haha. A friend was an assistant pastor at the one CRC church in St. Louis, and we had worked together for years at developing small groups, in the hopes of starting up church plants. He has since moved on, and I am praying about where I should proceed from here. I think the CRC has a great theology, but it suffers pretty heavily from the idea that church growth comes from “immigration and procreation,” as one pastor pointed out to me. I feel like the Reformed faith is capable of some amazing things, but we can’t reduce ourselves to solely inward-thinking, lest we wither.

      It seems like our view is not exclusive to our churches, but we can carry the Reformed view into most other denominations. I recently visited a friend in an Anglican seminary, and there are several Reformed students there. Also, in my discussions with Greg Herr and other Catholics, there are many Reformed people in the Catholic tradition as well!

      I wrestle with similar things, my friend. I’ll be praying for you as you wrestle.

      1. George Aldhizer Avatar
        George Aldhizer

        Thanks Mark for your response and prayers. Looking forward to continuing our dialogue in the future.

        I certainly will have to read TF Torrance, and the other books that you’ve mentioned. I’ve certainly profited from the covenant theology you love. And I agree with you about the potential for over-intellectualizing the faith. It certainly interests me that you are from the CRC wing, and that you mention “You Are What You Love,” James K.A. Smith (and the neo-calvinism that he espouses) have been very influential in my thinking and excitement about the broad reach of the good news.

        Very interesting that you speak of Reformed people in the Catholic tradition, I’m not familiar as to how that could be possible. I myself am drawn to the Anglican tradition for its liturgy and connection to Reformed theology, I am intrigued by the thought that there are Reformed folks in Roman Catholicism.

  5. TJ Humphrey Avatar
    TJ Humphrey

    Hi Mark, I am a bit late to the party here. Sorry! I wanted to ask a question. John Zizioulas has written on a few occasions that, as long as confessionalism exists, church unity will be an impossibility. Many of my Episcopalian friends agree with this notion as well. They deplore the idea of the Thirty Nine Articles being used confessionally (which they were never meant to be used in this way to begin with). The argument is that confessionalism actually fosters individualism, whereas episcopal ecclesiology promotes genuine communion (after the image of the Triune God). Confessionalism is knowledge-centric, whereas episcopalianism is relationahip-centric. So, my question: how do you envision unity being achieved between confessional denominations and the episcopal ones? In other words, how do you react to Zizioulas?

    PS: not to resurrect that old debate between Zizioulas and Torrance…actually…that might be kind of fun.

    1. Mark Green Avatar
      Mark Green

      I would envision unity simply as people from the various traditions speaking to one another with an open mind and heart to love their brothers and sisters in the Lord. Zizioulas makes a powerful point that so long as we stubbornly refuse to get off of our high horse and affirm that our unity comes from Christ’s Incarnation, death, and resurrection rather than a human document or confession, then unity will be impossible. There is a degree of confessionalism that is crucial to any of our traditions; show me an Anglican, Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant church that says it’s okay to mess with the central tenets of the Nicene Creed, and I’ll show you a heretical church that needs correction, albeit in love and grace. So some degree of knowledge is crucial. To the extent that some take it, not so much; but if Hebrews 5:12-14 is to be followed, we all (clergy and layman alike) must seek to grow in knowledge and understanding of the Scriptures and our theology as it has developed through the centuries.

      The real difficulty is between bishop or priest-led churches and churches led by a council. And for this, I would simply say that we need places to talk about it. Unifying those denominations would take a huge amount of administrative reworking, and I’m not sure entirely how it would look at the end of it. Protestants do not see the same symbolic importance of the bishop as an image of Christ’s unity and leadership, oftentimes because they do not utilize iconography in the same way as episcopal churches. Instead, Protestants use the pastor and council of elders, the Scriptures, and Christ Himself as their foci in seeking unity. Much greater dialogue than a comments section would be needed to fully flesh that out, though.

      1. TJ Humphrey Avatar
        TJ Humphrey

        Thanks for taking my questions on. Zizioulas doesn’t address how people entrench themselves behind their confessions and tune others out. Rather, he critiques confessionalism period. He believes that it, as an institution, confessionalism is the main obstacle to the achievement of unity. Sorry, I should have clarified that from the start. In other words, it is not how people use confessions that is the problem. Rather, confessions are the problem.

        To your other point, I think that one could make the case that the creeds are different from what we commonly think of as confessions. The creeds were not simply established to figure out what to say, but also what not to say. There are intentional apophatic bits to them. Thus, the creeds are an invitation to mystery whereas confessions tend to be an invitation to detail. Confessions want spell out as much as possible, whereas the creeds are satisfied with being succinct and somewhat vague. I am not sure an Anglican, Catholic, or Orthodox person would classify themselves as confessional since their “theology”, per se, is not the primary source of unity for them. This isn’t a belittling of knowledge, but just a different significance and use for it.

        I agree, though, in that ecclesiology is the main issue.

      2. Mark Green Avatar
        Mark Green

        Gotcha, I sort of got where you were getting at, though I went a little of-track.

        My argument would be that confessions are not necessarily the problem, but rather how people use them. I had a professor who I believe brilliantly said that he took no exceptions to the Westminster Confession not because he agreed with them but because he didn’t want to make the WCF into more than what it was. (As a note, I use the WCF as an example primarily because it is one of the main confessions at the center of the confessionalism controversy)

        My statement regarding the Nicene Creed was simply to say that there is an element of confessionalism that exists in every tradition. I understand that the purpose of the Nicene Creed in the Church is markedly different. However, consider this:

        The Nicene Creed emerged from the first council held by a legal and global Church in order to clarify the nature of the Triune God in an age where Christ’s divinity was in question. The WCF was a confession developed by English Protestants in order to clarify the Reformed view of doctrines in light of their separation from the Roman Catholic Church. The true genius of Nicaea, however, is its brevity; it gives you just enough information to know the primary tenets of Scripture. The WCF, on the other hand, had much more material to sift through, and they felt like they needed to elaborate more to account for divergence from Catholicism. Do I agree with everything in the WCF? Of course not. But I do understand their feelings in why they made such a statement.

        Protestantism is an easy target of blame for Christian disunity, and for the most part when considering the modern condition of the Church, I do agree with that. And confessionalism is to blame for much of that. My primary focus here is essentially to say that we should be very careful before we lay blame solely upon one side of the division, as I feel it leads to the same place that confessionalism does, though coming from ecclesiology rather than dogmatics.

        Disunity grows from confessionalism, true, but it also grows from dwelling on the problems of others rather than our own. That’s what I ultimately wanted to get across.

        Thank you, though, for bringing all of this up! It made me really take a look at another critical element of what is required for unity to happen.

      3. TJ Humphrey Avatar
        TJ Humphrey

        Well said. Thanks for addressing my questions.

      4. TJ Humphrey Avatar
        TJ Humphrey

        Perhaps if confessions were a bit less binding, and used more as theological guidelines, perhaps this would be helpful? That is the way the 39 Articles are generally used. I also think the RCA views their confessions this way. This would allow for conviction, but also for theological dialogue.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Conciliar Post

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading