Like so many others, my family spent some significant time this week without any power due to the windstorm that swept through the Ohio Valley on Sunday. As my kids complained about all that they were doing without, I encouraged them to stop and reflect on those in our world who live every day without our conveniences and luxuries. Of course, while teaching them a valuable lesson, I was secretly bemoaning the fact that my computer would not come on, the phone didn't work, and I couldn't find an open gas station. I'm pretty good at teaching others lessons I have yet to learn myself.
But setting my hypocrisy aside for a moment, I have to admit that this week did force me to wrestle with the question of what is truly essential. Apparently, we have an innate ability to turn non-essential things into necessities we cannot live without. In our consumer-focused, convenience-minded culture of abundance, we are undoubtedly shaped by that tendency more than we care to admit. Somehow, in our minds, non-essentials become essential. As I thought about that in the material sense, I could not help but think about how that same tendency also reveals itself in the realm of church, ministry, and the spiritual life. Even there, we find it all to easy to turn non-essentials into core values.
Think, for a moment, about the conflicts that Jesus faced during His ministry. It seems to me that many of those battles revolved around the issue of what is truly essential. For the Pharisees and others, matters like picking grain on the Sabbath, fasting on the appropriate day, washing in the right way and at the right time, what particular day of the week you came to be healed, and not eating with the wrong kind of people, were all seen as essential matters of God's kingdom. When Jesus conveyed a different understanding of what is truly essential, they took offense and conflict ensued.
For Jesus, what mattered most was loving God with all of our heart, soul, mind, and strength, and loving others as we love ourselves. These were the priorities that governed His ministry, determining what, where, and when He did what He did. Jesus, quite simply and deliberately, set non-essential things aside for the sake of living out the essential character of God's kingdom, a kingdom of love, grace, mercy, and justice. He did not allow outward traditions and rituals to overrule that which is genuinely essential, which brought him into conflict with those who wanted to make such matters primary.
Now, I'm probably already in trouble with some of you, because you know where this is headed. But in all honesty, I don't think we can deny that many of the conflicts we face in our churches today revolve around the same issue. Just as we so often do with the material things of life, we can elevate non-essential elements of church life to the status of necessity. As a result, our particular forms and styles of worship and ministry become battlegrounds; music styles, what time and day we have church, how the pastor dresses, and whether we have Sunday School on Sunday morning or small groups on Tuesday night, are fought over as if these matters provide the essential foundation of the Church.
It's not that these non-essential things are wrong in and of themselves; it's just they are not essential. And when we try to make them the essential issues of the church, we blind ourselves to what matters most. We argue about styles of worship, and in the process lose sight of what worship really is. We debate about the process of making disciples, and ignore the fact that we aren't doing it anyway. We rise up in defense of how we are supposed to "do" church, but fail to see what God has called us to be as His people.
Even good things, when given the wrong priority, become idols. As the followers of Jesus, when we allow non-essential issues to become more important to us than what is truly essential, we cease to be salt and light in our world. Just as the Pharisees, we can become consumed with defending our particular way, and in so doing, fail to live out God's heart and purpose.
The definition of what is essential has not changed. As Jesus revealed to us, and expressed so clearly in His own ministry, this is all about loving God and loving others, living out what it means to be the people of His kingdom through the transforming power and grace of His Spirit. To let anything else become more important in my life, or the life of the church, is to sadly miss the point.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I agree wholeheartedly with the points you are making.
And at the risk of sounding anti-Nazarene (which I am not), it seems to me that we have an entire theology centered around turning non-essentials into essentials. We call it the Covenant of Christian Conduct.
Now, I am not saying that these prohibited behaviors are good and wholesome, but when we put together a list of unapproved actions such as we do in our Manual, (as if we can definitively define sin), we are redefining the essentials in a way that places an interpretation of what it means to love God and love our neighbors above simply listeneing to the direction of the Spirit.
Now, I am not in disagreement with the Covenant of Christian Conduct in its essence, but on a practical level it really does seem to substitute our judgement for the prompting and conviction of the Holy Spirit on certain issues.
I am encouraged by the continual addressing of this section of the Manual by our General Assemblies, however I wonder if we will ever arrive at the day when the only requirements we have for being an "official" Nazarene is that we simply commit ourselves to love God and love our neighbor. To me, this would make membership much more meaningful then asking someone if they are in harmony with the Manual.
I am pretty sure that I have strayed from the line of thinking you were on, however the defining of essentials takes place at many levels of the church. I am just not so certain that we are always in the right when we "lay down the law," so to speak.
I totally agree with all of this. A person can really get so wrapped up in just trying to follow the "letter of the law", that they violate the heart of what Jesus was all about. It reminds me of the movie Chocolat. The Comte de Reynaud was completely sure of his piety because he used his "dos" and "don'ts" as a measuring stick to judge others. This blocked his ability to see clearly the need to just love and accept them. Then there was Vianne Rocher. She felt the need to carry her mother's ashes and continue in her mother's traditions despite what her heart was telling her. Some of us seem to be motivated to try to do all the right things and check them off our list. Others feel the need to follow in tradition out of fear of the unknown or a desire to carry the family torch on. Overall, I really liked what you had to say and how you said it. I absolutely agree.
~Ben Y's Sister
Essentials are just that- and leave the rest in the realm of grace.
Since those who grasp your thesis are generally outnumbered by those who do not, the onus is on us to be willing to exercise grace, as we try and bring the focus where it belongs.
It takes time.
Keith
Thanks, lin-nay-uh. I think there are a number of reasons we tend to get wrapped up in the letter of the law and a particular form or tradition. Perhaps, for the most part, it creates a sense of control and security. If everything can be reduced to a list of prescribed activities, I am left with the idea that I can "manage" and control the direction of things. To live a life of genuine love for God and others, however, will undoubtedly push me beyond the realm of comfort and force me to depend radically on the grace of God.
Keith, you're absolutely right. We are called to be people of grace at all times and toward all people, even toward those "insiders" that we believe are missing it at some point. How easy it is to end up reflecting the very same attitude we are reacting against in others. If we are not careful, we can substitute one form of legalism and arrogance for another. Excellent word of caution.
Heath, I understand where you are coming from and I know you are not anti-Nazarene. Perhaps the underlying question is, "What is the role of the 'collective conscience' of a church body?"
Post a Comment