Here I continue discussion of the book That We May Be One: Practicing Unity in a Divided Church by Church of God minister Gary B. Agee. Everyone is invited to participated this time, but be sure to follow the rules stated at the end here.
I fail to find a single, clear definition of “unity” in the chapter entitled Speaking of Unity. The first section is headlined “Unity Defined,” but what I find there is a description of unity. In one long sentence Gary writes “Where unity is encouraged, a spirit of comaraderie and connectedness binds together individuals on opposite sides of contentious moral issues as well as those of different races, class groups, ethnicities, gender communities, political affiliations, age groups, and sexual orientations.” (35) A few sentences later, on the same page he writes “Sometimes separation is necessary for the integrity of a cause [but] the commitment to unity puts it off until absolutely necessary.” Near the end of the chapter he writes “God’s kingdom knows no borders or boundaries.” (42)
With Gary, I am a strong believer in Christian unity, but I worry that he and I disagree about the depth and breadth of unity among people who call themselves “Christian.” In private communication Gary tells me that by “we” in the title of his book he means God’s kingdom people. That we can agree on. IF “we” and “kingdom people” means true Christians, then I am with him all the way. However…
I suspect that the devil in the details has to do with when and under what circumstances separation both within and outside of God’s kingdom is necessary.
My very broad experiences of “rubbing shoulders” with people who might be Christians, who certainly think they are Christians, tells me that very often separation in terms of Christian fellowship is necessary. I’m not talking about a schism among Amish over whether to wear buttons or hooks. I’m talking about clear deviations from the true gospel, bordering on, leaning into, a false gospel.
I have learned to have Christian fellowship with non-Trinitarian Christians who simply misunderstand the Trinity and are confused about it. But I cannot have Christian fellowship with anyone who denies the deity of Jesus Christ. I don’t know what Gary would say. I hope he would say, yes, that is a case of necessary separation. But so far I am left wondering.
There are even less extreme (in terms of doctrine) necessary separations. I belonged to an evangelical Baptist church that fell into unethical behavior towards its ministerial staff. After struggling to help the church get it right, when the behavior got worse, even to the point of being abusive, I had to leave the church. I had been a faithful member for eight years.
On the other hand, I believe all Christians should strive to answer, with God’s help, Jesus’s prayer that we should be one. I start with open communion. I believe closed communion is the sin of sectarianism. I go on to believe that Christian churches should cooperate with each other and even look for opportunities to unite.
I celebrate the “Memphis Miracle” where, in the 1990s, the Pentecostal Fellowship of North America (PFNA) voluntarily dissolved itself while simultaneously asking the predominantly Black Church of God in Christ, the oldest Pentecostal denomination in America, to form a new fellowship of Pentecostals. The PFNA people strongly implied that they would like to be invited into the new fellowship. A new racially inclusive multi-denominational fellowship of Pentecostal and charismatic churches was formed and still exists.
The reason the PFNA dissolved is that my uncle, then president of one Pentecostal denomination and on the national board of the PFNA, discovered in the archives that when the PFNA was founded in the 1940s it consciously excluded Black denominations and churches. He and other Pentecostal leaders decided that it was not enough to reform the PFNA. Since it was founded in racism, it needed to be dissolved.
I celebrated denominational unions and reunions. I look forward to the day when Catholics and Protestants can enjoy full Christian fellowship around the Lord’s Table. Until then, I invite Catholics and others who practice closed communion to join me at the table in my church.
Having said all that, I must add that I am not entirely comfortable with the seemingly very broad “tent” that Gary describes.
Although he has not said anything (yet) about Latter Day Saints/Mormons, I will use The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints as my example. I have been to Brigham Young University for inter religious dialogue events three times. There I met very nice people and observed a very nice campus. However, due to our very deep and serious doctrinal differences, I could not have Christian fellowship with them. I ate with them and conversed with them and enjoyed their company. But I cannot participate in a Latter Day Saints worship service or prayer meeting. And if a Latter Day Saint man or woman wanted to join my church I would have to ask him or her to renounce Mormonism and embrace the gospel including monotheism, the forever deity of Jesus Christ (viz., that he did not become divine and was never Lucifer’s “brother”) and some other key doctrines of Christian orthodoxy. Having said all of that, I insist that I am not judging Latter Day Saints’ salvation. I am defending the integrity of the gospel.
*Note: If you choose to comment, make sure your comment is relatively brief (no more than 100 words), on topic, addressed to me, civil and respectful (not hostile or argumentative), and devoid of pictures or links.*
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In