However, I don’t think race or socio-economic status is the biggest unity challenge among Churches of Christ. Our big problem is overcoming our sectarian past.
We may no longer think that the Baptists and Catholics are going to hell, but we still act that way. After all, we may have a member or two who would get upset if we were to actually behave as though the denominations are saved, too.
I keep getting drawn back to —
(Gal 2:11 ESV) But when Cephas [the apostle Peter] came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
The translation “stood condemned” is controversial, but it carries the weight of scholarly consensus.
The renderings of the NIV (“in the wrong”) and the NRSV (“self-condemned”) both soften the severity of Paul’s judgment; because Peter’s action was a betrayal of the gospel, Paul saw him as standing under God’s condemnation. …
At the same time, it also suggests that Paul could not assume the experience of sharing the eucharist as a basis for his broader argument about table fellowship. It would have been a powerful argument for Paul to say, “If you share the bread and wine with Gentiles at the table of the Lord, how can you refuse to eat ordinary meals together?” Paul’s silence on this point suggests that Peter, Barnabas, and other Jewish Christians were not celebrating the Lord’s supper with the Gentile Christians in Antioch.
Richard B. Hays, “The Letter to the Galatians,” in 2 Corinthians-Philemon (vol. 11 of New Interpreters Bible, Accordance electronic ed. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000), 233-234.
The major theme of the unit is that the gospel mandates the formation of a new community in which there is no division between Jew and Gentile, a community in which Jews and Gentiles eat at one table together, not two separate tables. The speech of vv. 14b–21 supports this claim by arguing that right relation to God depends fundamentally on “the grace of God” (2:21), and not on observance of the ethnically particular signs of covenant membership (circumcision and food laws). This grace has been made effective through the death of Jesus Christ, which avails for Jew and Gentile without distinction (cf. Rom 3:21–31). Consequently, Peter’s withdrawal from table fellowship with Gentile believers at Antioch was, as Paul sees it, a symbolic rejection of God’s reconciling grace.
Richard B. Hays, “The Letter to the Galatians,” in 2 Corinthians-Philemon (vol. 11 of New Interpreters Bible, Accordance electronic ed. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000), 231. (I can’t tell you how excited I am to have Richard Hays’ commentary on Galatians, along with N. T. Wright’s commentary on Romans in the New Interpreters Bible set.)
Peter actually considered the Gentile Christians to be saved. He just wouldn’t participate with them in the Lord’s Support or Love Feast — in order to keep the circumcision party happy — those Jews from Jerusalem who considered circumcision essential to salvation. He was being a politician. After all, what harm is there in yielding to the scruples of the circumcision party? Why not keep everyone happy? Why antagonize the Jews who’d been long-time members of the church just to eat a meal with a segment of the congregation?
Well, Paul saw things very differently. It wasn’t about politics and keeping the peace but the gospel. And the gospel declares the Gentiles saved by faith — without circumcision — and to act otherwise is to condone division of the body of Christ, encouraging the separation of Jews and Gentiles.
As a result, Paul declared Peter condemned! Damned. Not for doctrinal error but for refusing to be in real, meaningful, active fellowship with a segment of the church all to make some of the more conservative members happy — to allow them to continue to treat their brothers and sisters damned.
Now, in the modern church, we avoid this problem by having so many congregations that we only have to take communion or eat a meal with people who are exactly like us. And this is anti-gospel. Indeed, it risks condemnation — especially if our motivation is to keep our more legalistic brothers and sisters happy. And I find this a terrifying thought.
So what’s the cure? It’s not as though we could easily merge congregations across denominational lines! And that is surely true. Today. True, but no excuse. It doesn’t take a lot of thought to imagine how we might conduct joint services with other denominations.
A couple of years ago, my own congregation had a combined church service with a predominantly black Baptist congregation. And it was not church the way we do church. They had liturgical dance. And incredible, brilliantly produced instrumental music. And it was just different. But different in a holy, affirming, God-glorifying way.
I am all in favor of monthly pastor lunches where preachers cross denominational boundaries and eat and pray with each other. And I’m all for efforts to plan campaigns together with other churches. But until you share table fellowship — until you take communion together — you’re still acting much more like Peter than Paul. And I find that, well, terrifying.
So find three congregations in town that aren’t like you. Make sure it’s a mix of races, denominations, and styles, but don’t forget that only those who believe in Jesus as Messiah are “churches” and invited. Stay away from the faithless.
And then set a one-year schedule of quarterly joint services, and insist that communion be served each time you’re a part of it. Plan services that don’t violate consciences, or else offer an alternative for those who can’t worship with an instrument, but be clear that no one is excused because they consider the Baptists damned. Teach the gospel and grace well enough that the church has no doctrinal scruples over such things. Yes, we disagree. But disagreement does not require separation.
Take turns hosting and being hosted. And then at year end, evaluate the effort, and then find another three churches and do it again.
Or maybe spend an entire summer rotating from church to church. It would be chaos, but such wonderful chaos it would be.
It’d change hearts and perceptions — and your entire city. People will start seeing each other not as fellow city dwellers but brothers and sisters in Christ. The gospel will begin to permeate your hometown as it never has before.
And without the leaders even trying, the members with common interests will find each other and found or reinvigorate countless ministries that serve the community.
It’ll be a game changer in ways we can’t even begin to imagine. But that’s the nature of the gospel. It just works so much better when we actually live it.
Jay, I was with you right up to when you allowed for “conscience” to be accounted for.. That was the Circumcision Party issue that you just exposed.. Those Gentiles had strange food and drink, different songs, different habits, different clothes, different customs, etc., etc.. In good conscience we can’t sit down with THAT !! I think you just pointed out that Paul, being inspired by God, made a special effort to convince Peter that he was in error. If a person’s “conscience” will allow them to be like Peter and the Circumcision party over some nitpicked issue formulated from either track rack hermeneutics, pattern theology, or just plain ignornance, then they have some real issues. I don’t think that kind of attitude should be enabled. IMO
Jay, if I view this post from the perspective of elders leading a moderate C of C congregation, trying to keep all the members happy, this takes on a very interesting perspective for me. By failing to disavow legalism and sectarianism within their congregation in the name of keeping peace (a “political” solution), the leaders are standing in the same place as Peter – condemned for not ACTING in line with the truth of the gospel (Gal 2:14). As I studied Galatians and caught the incredible passion the Paul has for these basic truths of the gospel, and how important these basics are, I found I could no longer tolerate my elders’ political solution, which was to still hang on to a false gospel of works-based righteousness. My family and I could no longer support them with our presence or tithe (after we had visited with them directly about these concerns), so we found another church (NOT C of C) that embraced the full gospel. I think those elders knew the truth, but they just wouldn’t act on it, and that made them just like Peter – condemned. Not many things are worth leaving for (music, women’s roles, etc.), but the basics truth that we are saved only by faith in Jesus is worth leaving a C of C that we had served at for 20 years. It was too bad and still painful to think of, but we had to do it in light of Galatians 2.
Jay, while I appreciate your desire for unity among all Christian sects, I would not call what you are proposing unity. I believe some are saved among many denominations as well, but let’s see how unified we are when a baptist minister, a restoration church minister, and a catholic share the gospel with a lost soul in the same room. We say ‘believe and be baptized’; they preach believe and pray and maybe be baptized some day; or they say believe, learn and sign off on the catechism, then be baptized. And in most cases they would have you out of fellowship before you could consider putting them out. You can dance around together and play house on Sunday mornings all you want, but until you are preaching the same gospel and the same response to the gospel, there isn’t really unity.
Jay with all due respect, I think you’re taking this verse too extremely. Yes, Peter sinned and actively refused to take part with the Gentiles to appease the false representatives of James(they really were of no sort). But to compare this to someone who prefers a certain style over another or who has not arrived yet to accept all Christians as saved is to me a stretch.
In 1 John chapter 3:20-21, the greek word Kataginosko is used in a non-damning way. Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think this is the term to use for an Apostate. On a side note, maybe this is indeed the moment that Satan sifted Peter as Jesus prophesied he would. But then says “when you recover, strengthen the saints”.
On the other hand, Peter was explicitly shown by God that he except the Gentiles on equal terms. So he knew both intellectually and experientially that both are one in Christ. Thayer comments that “kataginosko(holding to blame) could be translated in the passive-that he was accused of bigotry by the Gentiles. Paul knowing full hand the situation showed him Tough Love!
A moments indiscretion, but definitely not something Peter believed in his heart was the right thing to do. Paul(the agent sent by God) got in his face, and reprimanded him of the mockery he was making of there being no respect of persons in Christ. Something, Peter, no doubt, received in humility. This doesn’t have the same ring as when Peter told Simon the sorcerer to repent therefore of this wickedness and pray God, if perhaps, the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.
Peter, perhaps sought to keep the peace, by catering to the squeakier of the two wheels, the circumcision bunch. For that he was wrong and Paul rebuked him for his error. What elder has never done that before in catering to the squeakier wheel?
I have something to say about conscience. First that conscience or belief system was formed from somewhere. It is not wrong to challenge that belief system in fact it is healthy. I think that it is really a good idea to go to a church that makes your uncomfortable and makes you think about why you believe what you believe. Two things happen when your belief system is challenged either we re-affirm what we already believe with deeper conviction or we re-learn something and have a deeper conviction still over what we believed previously. It seems that this unity thing still gets stuck on the same thing. It is not wrong for us to challenge our consciences and belief system on a constant basis. In fact it is the only way to deepen and strengthen our belief system. So go to another church help serve in their soup kitchen r something and challenge your belief system! That is how serious Paul was in his unity efforts.
In many churches of Christ Paul is stressed far more than Jesus and quoted way more in sermons and writings than all the chosen by God apostles put together.
Church of Paul should be posted above their door.
That is what happens when simple folks like fishermen are writing letters compared to the writing and them being tied in with a lawyer!!!
When a church is quoting the apostles more than Paul, you can bet its a denomination doing so.
That is the BIG difference we must overcome to have togetherness.
Mark,
The church of Christ is built on obeying laws far more than the love and mercy of God for man. Far more of fear or error than love of God. That is why following Paul, a lawyer, and our interpretation of his lawyer thinking on right and wrong is done. When Paul became a Christian, he was led by the Holy Spirit but still wrote in lawyer terms and language that can be easily interpreted to condemn practically anyone for some action of belief different from ours.
Have seen it done many times during debates with various denominations.This was the entertainment before evenings were spent watching TV.
For any to see Paul and interpret his teaching in another more kind manner is not received as truth and any denomination or any COC member that does so is considered teaching error. In many cases living it too. Many have been asked to leave or been withdrawn from for this reason.
This was very obvious in the years past when the COC debated any denomination that would show up. Mainly Pauls writings were used as a weapon against them. Fear of God was the thing, never the love of God. Only exception was and still is in most COC today, its the words expressed in the songs we sing about the love of God for us.
As a side note, tomorrow is Easter and many will celebrate it. In most COC there will be a stern lesson on baptism, attendance, or some other thing stressed by Paul instead.
How things are changing for the better, and Jay, Al Maxey, and several others are leading the way. I’m so proud of them for doing so. Its good to hear of the love of God for us and our love for Him.
Who better to interpret Paul and second handed the Holy Spirit properly in a better understanding of his writing than another trained and educated lawyer like Jay.
Listen to them closely!!!