Church Reform and Christian Unity tagged: , , , , , ,

Church Reform and Christian Unity

Posted by in Baptist Life

I don’t know why, but for some reason I am especially sensitive to areas in the church that I believe need reforming. Maybe it’s because I grew up in the 60’s and 70’s, and have been infected with the contemporaneous zeitgeist (or “spirit of the times”). Maybe it’s because the opportunities I have had in life have led me down “the road less traveled“ (as the old Robert Frost poem said), and I have seen that thinking outside the box can be a good thing every now and then. Maybe it’s because I have lived overseas for 20 years, and have been exposed to other ideas and other ways of doing things. Maybe it’s because I like to look hard at what Scripture really says, and not conform to “that’s the way it is, because that’s the way it’s always been,” or “just because we say so.” Maybe it’s because, as a disciple of Jesus, and a member of Christ’s body, the Holy Spirit is “guiding me into all truth,” just as He promised.

In any case, with respect to the way “we” typically do things, there are a handful of traditions and practices that I am convinced are neither the most biblical nor the most effective. From time to time, in the past couple of years, I have written about some of these here on SBC Impact.

I guess that makes me something of a “church reformer.” As I look back in church history, though, I realize I am in good company. I am grateful for church reformers. If it were not for people like Hus, Wyclif, Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli, no telling where we would be today. The courageous contributions of the Radical Reformers of the Anabaptist movement have led to great blessing for millions. As Baptists, we have a proud heritage of spiritual dissent. Thanks to people like William Carey and Andrew Fuller, who were not afraid to swim against the tide, multiplied millions have heard the gospel by way of those who followed their example. Due to the convictional courage of people like Spurgeon, and, in more recent years, the leaders of the Southern Baptist Conservative Resurgence, a biblically compromising status quo has been challenged, and faithfulness to God’s eternal Word defended and sustained. Apparently, we have always had church reformers among us; and, as the Reformation watchword semper reformanda implies, thank God, we always will.

It may be argued, however, that some reformers and reform movements have ended up doing more harm than good. Some have been more sectarian than anything else, and their ideas have led people down the path of deception into false cults and religious movements. Though some within the Roman Catholic Church are becoming more and more sympathetic toward the figure of Luther, the “schism” caused by the Protestant Reformation is still viewed by many as a gaping wound in the side of Christendom. In turn, many of the spiritual descendants of Luther, Calvin and Zwingli look on the Radical Reformers, and those of us who have been influenced by their ideas, in pretty much the same way.

As Baptists, though, we have not just been on the receiving end of things. Throughout our comparatively brief history, we have pretty much had a similar attitude toward people like Alexander Campbell (and the Church of Christ), and perhaps, to a lesser extent, those from the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements. In recent years, others, such as the Seeker Sensitive and Emerging Church folks, have become the favorite whipping boys of some.

Of course, as Baptists, we think we are right, because our beliefs and practices line up with the truth of the Bible. Some would go so far as to claim that, since Baptist ecclesiology is not an innovation, but a return to New Testament purity, we are not truly reformers, but restorationists. To a certain degree, I would agree. For those who think that, as Baptists, we have totally shaken off centuries of corrupted church tradition, and returned all the way to a pure unadulterated New Testament ecclesiology, though, I recommend an open-minded reading of Frank Viola and George Barna’s Pagan Christianity, in which the evidence is quite conclusive we still have a long way to go.

It seems there are always new ways we can seek to be more faithful to the pattern of church life laid down for us in the New Testament. And well we should. The problem for all of us as church reformers, though, if we continue to consider our views as purer than anyone else’s, and, as a result, continue to narrow our circle of fellowship and cooperation, is that we find ourselves part of a smaller and smaller group of enlightened spiritual elite.

Sometimes, spiritual separation is inevitable. Luther never intended to separate from the Catholic Church. Wesley did not intend for his followers, the Methodists, to separate from the Anglican Church. Yet, it happened. And personally, I think we are better off because it did. However, whenever possible, I think we need to do our best to not further divide the body of Christ as a result of our reforms and innovations.

One good way to channel our church reforming tendencies into something constructive is through church planting. The truth be told, what motivates many missionaries is the desire for the freedom and opportunity to put their church reform ideas into practice. It is hard for a true reformer to be in a “traditional” church and remain content. From what I have read, for example, much of what motivated Jim Elliot, in his missionary efforts with the Auca Indians in the jungle of Ecuador, was the desire to find a group of people so remote and isolated that they had no contact whatsoever with Christians, and thus had not been contaminated by the corruption of 1900 years of Christendom, and teach them from scratch pure biblical ecclesiology.

Nowadays, groups like the Aucas are few and far between. A reality we must deal with, as missionaries, and those who, in one way or another, would like to cooperate in the task of world evangelization, is the presence of national churches, with their own traditions and ways of doing things. And the truth is, many of these traditions and ways of doing things are not always totally in line with our avant garde and spiritually illumined ideas about doing church.

According to Wikipedia, Everett Rogers, in his milestone book The Diffusion of Innovations, “proposes that adopters of any new innovation or idea can be categorized as innovators (2.5%), early adopters (13.5%), early majority (34%), late majority (34%) and laggards (16%).” As church reformers, we, by definition, fall into the category of innovators or early adopters.

In recent years, many IMB workers have been enthralled by non-traditional ways of doing church, such as house churches, church planting movements, and whatever the latest thing to come down the pipe might happen to be. No doubt, a good part of this is due to a healthy commitment to do “whatever it’s going to take” to reach the unreached peoples of the world. However, there are those (like myself, at times, I must confess) who just like to see ourselves on the cutting edge, a step or two in front of everyone else.

Because of this, we church reformers need to remind ourselves that 84% of the people out there are neither “innovators” nor “early adopters.” They are, however, just as much a part of the body of Christ as we are. The “end-vision“ of the Great Commission is to bring every member of the body to “unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God” and help them “become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.” That includes the “late majority” and the “laggards.“ While clinging to semper reformanda, and continuing to seek and follow after truth no matter the cost, let’s be careful to maintain the unity of the faith, and not anathematize nor disparage all those who may not happen to be on the “early adopter” side of the innovation curve.