Others figured this out before me, but some time ago I realized that C.S. Lewis produced "duets" of books: for the sake of one type of reader, he would write a nonfiction book; for the sake of another type, he would demonstrate the topics with a fiction novel.
Example 1. The Abolition of Man was accompanied by That Hideous Strength.
Example 2. The Four Loves was accompanied by Till We Have Faces.
Those are the two I know of. There are others (see here for examples).
Now for a puzzler that I've wondered about for years. When he died he was working on After Ten Years, which was more or less a reworking of the Iliad + Odyssey. I haven't read it for maybe 15 years, so it's not fresh in my mind, and yet I can't help but wonder: what was its nonfiction dual? Does it exist?
Monday, August 29, 2011
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
The Undivided Church and Authority - Congregationalism
When you detect heresy, who do you blame? The people, or the leaders, or both?
Congregationalists, i.e. American churches such as most Baptist churches, have a serious problem: each congregation either works from complete autonomy, or else is a slave to a governing body. You either cook up your own heresy, or else you swallow some remote authority's pronouncements. Yes, I'm including the Southern Baptist Convention in this, because they make pronouncements that they expect churches to fall in line over, and play power politics just like our Congress.
As Americans, we believe that individual rights are supreme. Yet this is not how a Christian should look at himself, nor his local church. We are all part of the invisible church, and body of Christ, each a building block that makes up the temple of God, corporately the kingdom of God. We are accountable to Christ and to one another.
Not that congregational polity is in error. We have plenty of examples of what happens when a non-accountable church government is established. Rome. Antioch. Canterbury. Geneva. The Synod. The General Assembly. And yet, congregations do not operate in isolation from one another. Why do they act as if they do?
Perhaps it has to do with fear. Fear of wasting time, working through doctrine, sharing power with other pastors, fear of compromising The Faith, fear of losing that rugged, God-given freedom from being accountable to each other of Christ. Fear that our differences are not resolvable. And blinders over our eyes that our traditions are often the traditions of men, and not Christ.
At the end of the day, it is the local congregation's responsibility to be accountable to each other and to neighbor congregations, regardless of denomination, and regardless of what sort of power structure you've been placed into by humans. Are you part of the bride of Christ or not? And just as important: aren't your sister churches part of the bride of Christ, or not?
Congregationalists, i.e. American churches such as most Baptist churches, have a serious problem: each congregation either works from complete autonomy, or else is a slave to a governing body. You either cook up your own heresy, or else you swallow some remote authority's pronouncements. Yes, I'm including the Southern Baptist Convention in this, because they make pronouncements that they expect churches to fall in line over, and play power politics just like our Congress.
As Americans, we believe that individual rights are supreme. Yet this is not how a Christian should look at himself, nor his local church. We are all part of the invisible church, and body of Christ, each a building block that makes up the temple of God, corporately the kingdom of God. We are accountable to Christ and to one another.
Not that congregational polity is in error. We have plenty of examples of what happens when a non-accountable church government is established. Rome. Antioch. Canterbury. Geneva. The Synod. The General Assembly. And yet, congregations do not operate in isolation from one another. Why do they act as if they do?
Perhaps it has to do with fear. Fear of wasting time, working through doctrine, sharing power with other pastors, fear of compromising The Faith, fear of losing that rugged, God-given freedom from being accountable to each other of Christ. Fear that our differences are not resolvable. And blinders over our eyes that our traditions are often the traditions of men, and not Christ.
At the end of the day, it is the local congregation's responsibility to be accountable to each other and to neighbor congregations, regardless of denomination, and regardless of what sort of power structure you've been placed into by humans. Are you part of the bride of Christ or not? And just as important: aren't your sister churches part of the bride of Christ, or not?
The Undivided Church and Authority - United Church of Christ
The United Church of Christ seems to represent a good effort for an undivided church.
Warning - Unfiltered, Non-Politically Correct Opinion Follows
It appears that the only problem - a major one - is that the General Synod doesn't acknowledge its congregational roots: their pronouncements are regularly broader and more liberal than the beliefs of those in the pews. That spells slow demolition on one hand, accompanied by a gradual slide into heresy on the other, of churches who remain members of the synod.
Warning - Unfiltered, Non-Politically Correct Opinion Follows
It appears that the only problem - a major one - is that the General Synod doesn't acknowledge its congregational roots: their pronouncements are regularly broader and more liberal than the beliefs of those in the pews. That spells slow demolition on one hand, accompanied by a gradual slide into heresy on the other, of churches who remain members of the synod.
The Undivided Church and Authority - Wesley
Summary
Wesleyan theology has two issues to think about:
(1) The transforming role of the Holy Spirit in the believer's life.
(2) The source and nature of man's resistance against Christ.
Carefully applying Wesley's own Four Sources of Authority in their proper order will resolve both of these issues. That's an exercise to better informed people than I.
Wesley's Four Sources of Authority
Wesley, channeling the Church of England, has a decent handle on authority: Scripture first, reason next, tradition (and those two must be interpreted as part of a community rather than any one person in an isolated, insulated vacuum), and experience.
Regarding experience, Wesley thought the believer's life should provide internal proof to each believer of God's promises being shared with him. Absolutely, God works in the lives of believers, and the believer's purpose is tied up in God's purpose, and the Fruits of the Spirit will manifest themselves (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control). So it seemd to me that Wesley's articulations are best understood as part of the transformation of the believer's life.
Now, note the Methodist confession.
It seems like the main internal contradiction is over humanity's Free Will versus God's unmerited favor. Which is stronger? In what way is "resistance" to God different from lack of faith, in other words, the natural state of an unsaved person?
Wesleyan theology has two issues to think about:
(1) The transforming role of the Holy Spirit in the believer's life.
(2) The source and nature of man's resistance against Christ.
Carefully applying Wesley's own Four Sources of Authority in their proper order will resolve both of these issues. That's an exercise to better informed people than I.
Wesley's Four Sources of Authority
Wesley, channeling the Church of England, has a decent handle on authority: Scripture first, reason next, tradition (and those two must be interpreted as part of a community rather than any one person in an isolated, insulated vacuum), and experience.
Regarding experience, Wesley thought the believer's life should provide internal proof to each believer of God's promises being shared with him. Absolutely, God works in the lives of believers, and the believer's purpose is tied up in God's purpose, and the Fruits of the Spirit will manifest themselves (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control). So it seemd to me that Wesley's articulations are best understood as part of the transformation of the believer's life.
Now, note the Methodist confession.
It seems like the main internal contradiction is over humanity's Free Will versus God's unmerited favor. Which is stronger? In what way is "resistance" to God different from lack of faith, in other words, the natural state of an unsaved person?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)