Subversive Christian Unity

I think he has noticed something very significant. Western Christianity, both Protestant and Catholic, lays much store by arguments, logic, affirmation of propositions, treating Christianity philosophically. In the Orthodox East, people tend to spend more time in experiential and personal pursuit of the Christian ideal. One place I notice this is in the Orthodox tendency to answer questions about the faith by talking about the life and practice of some saint or other, where Western Christians are more likely to invoke the theories of theologians. 

There are two ways Christians talk to each other about the Christian faith. One way is "What Christianity means to me." Archbishop John Sentamu excels at this mode of explanation. Pope Francis's heartfelt if misunderstood forays into new thinking are of the same sort. Indeed, laymen are told and encouraged to "give their testimony," so it is a widely used mode of Christian expression, perhaps the widest. The other is to ask what Christianity timelessly is and requires. C.S. Lewis, Augustine, J.I. Packer and writers of that slant seek to separate the "me" out of it. Such people make everyone uncomfortable by implying that what it means to me might not be right, or at least, that my understanding might not be the central part of the story. One way looks inward. One way looks upward. Before arguing with someone, you should be very sure you know which kind of statement you are arguing with. It is seldom fruitful to inform someone that his interpreta...

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.  (1 Cor 1:10) That was an easier thing to ask in the first century than in our day, because the problem was simpler.  The early church's doctrine was the kerygma , a call to faith based on news of what Christ said and did. This is the material that went into the four canonical gospels that have come down to us. To round out that teaching, the apostles wrote letters clarifying how to be a Christian, these were saved and circulated in the early church, and are now our New Testament epistles. The Old Testament was prized in the early church for its wisdom and for its prophecies of the Messiah. It was a time before formalistically systematized theologies were composed, denominational distinctives defined, and the associated battle lines drawn. Elaboratio...

In real life I program computers. Programmers have favorite computer languages. Mine is C, and I can always start an argument by saying we don't really need other languages. People who have other favorites then take umbrage and start a debate. It is common in the tech community to refer to such kerfluffles as religious conflicts, and that is unfortunately apropos. The parallelism with religious debates is striking. People describing the same things in different ways, pursuing the same answers by different means, instinctively see one another as doing something wrong. I say that a program variable is, in reality, simply a numbered position in the computer's memory, what is called in computerese an address. That is the wrong way to look at it, say proponents of the higher levels of abstract symbolism. What is important, they say, is meaning.  We sound like a bunch of theologians. I am coming round to the conclusion, after years of thinking about it, that ...

Don't leave home without it. If you do not forgive others, God will not forgive your errors. There is an odd aspect here that I think bears a look. It is not quite accurate to say that we forgive God, for he surely does no wrong, but we may become very angry at what he does or leaves undone. There are examples in the Bible of people bitter or angry at God, lest you think yourself the first. If we think hard enough about it, we will see that we already know that God works all things to good and when we cross the divide of death and see things from his eternal perspective, we will agree he did the right thing. We will see our anger at him as smallminded and shortsighted. Essentially we are trusting him to pay off the balance due. Of the harms and hurts we have endured he has said, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay." But to us, those who turn to him, he has promised his forgiveness for the sake of his son. Further, he has promised us that in the world to come he will w...

I think most posts I make here from now on will be on the following pillar concepts. While it is always possible for God to surprise me, I think that future progress toward a unified Christendom, whatever shape that progress may take, will require our attention to these points. Learn the limits of intellect. If our strivings at wisdom result in division, just how wise does that show us to be?  Honor Christ's new commandment. Stop evading it by conflating it with "Love your neighbor as yourself." It's a different and more challenging concept.  Make the visible unification of Christendom your honest goal. Some people, if they were honest, would prefer keeping their own fiefdoms.

Tha apostle Paul assures us that God works all things to good for those who love the Lord, who are the called according to his purpose. On its face that is at times hard to believe.  Much happens that seems productive not of good but ill. The thing was written to encourage faith but it is capable of stirring doubts as well. But what if, in some circumstance, the good produced is not your own good? A friend of yours sees you bearing up under grievous trials, is impressed thinking that Christians have courage, and becomes a Christian himself. You have gained a friend for heaven and the future, and one would surely call that good. Or perhaps troubles that seem, in the present day, to be only harm and hurt are teaching you some lesson that will useful in the future. Perhaps when young you get injured badly and learn lessons in wound care in the worst way (but the way that teaches best), and later on, you will comfort someone else who is hurt or even save his life. ...

Our Lord Jesus had something very revealing to say about false prophets: You shall know them by their fruits. He did not urge us to analyze the fine points of their reasoning or fault their grasp of systematic theology. Whatever they say, what they do won't turn out right. Notice that by pointing us to a test on that basis, he levels the intellectual playing field. Believers who might be fooled by a glib spokesman for a false idea need not be. They need only watch the result. I put a lot of stock in the test of results. I have seen Christians whose grasp of theology I find a bit lacking do works of mercy and kindness that make me take my hat off. I have also seen clever theologians support ideas that are unwholesome in practice when you look at what interests are actually served. In this connection I would cite recent Episcopalian revisions to the rite of marriage, which appear to be unhelpful even to those the revisions are meant to gratify. So even after we h...

My thinking has veered in an odd direction due to some life trials that made no sense. If we are to trust God even when life takes on an absurdist air, when try as we might we cannot make sense of what is happening, we should ask what that says about our rationality and the role of intellect. There are times when our understanding fails us and only faith avails us anything. Finding that out has changed the way in which I approach ecumenism, and everything else. I was dropped into a series of circumstances that were on an objective level unreasonable, by which I mean they made no sense to me and would make no sense to anyone. I was tempted by the falsehood I have already described in these pages as the "bad daddy argument," in which we ask something like "where is God when things are so messed up?" One may even cry out, "Oh God, how could you?" Then the tempter invites us to conclude that God is not really there, or if he is, not on our side after all. ...

We are all limited in our understanding of God's salvation: how it works out day by day.  Sometimes it scares us, sometimes it sickens us, and sometimes it draws Jonah's reaction: I am angry enough even to die! I suggest an exercise in accurate reasoning. The other fellow, whose religious ideas you deeply disagree with, is likely as limited as you in his understanding. You do not altogether understand life. Neither does he. Some aspects, and some experiences along the way, startle you with God's severity or awe you with his mercy. You just scraped by, you think, by the grace of God. You are exactly right about that. So is the other fellow.