Hello all:
So I recieved an email back from the minister at the indepedent Christian church we visited.
He stated that his congregation was not considered “liberal” in their brotherhood, and that women both speak and serve the Lord’s Supper in both services.
After I received his email, I talked with a friend who grew up in the independent Christian churches. He had a lot to say, but the two most interesting were these:
1) He feels that Christian Churches have defined themselves as being for unity, while we in the Churches of Christ have defined ourselves by what we are against.
2) That he was a part of a group of independent Churches of Christ (the instrumental kind) that set themselves apart from the Christian Churches for being to liberal, and from the a capella churches for being to lax on holiness issues and too strict/arbitrary on what we are against.
I had two responses for him on these comments. While I would generally agree with his first statement about the churches of Christ, I personally would define it as more of what we are not than what we are against. As to his second comment, it reminded me of my childhood. I grew up in both the “mainline” and non-institutional churches. The non-institutional churches seperated themselves from the “mainline” for being to liberal, and the mainline seperated itself from the “anti’s” for being lax on holiness issues and being to strict/arbitray on what they were against.
That struck me as ironic. Having grown up in both fellowships, I know that neither is all that true.
The “liberals,” i.e. the mainline churches, aren’t really all that liberal. Sure, there are liberal churches, but there are also very conservative churches. The central doctrines are all the same. In the same way, there are more liberal non-institutional churches, and more conservative ones.
Also, the holiness issues aren’t really there. The more liberal people, no matter how “unliberal” those people really are, typically look down on the conservative people as being too caught up in doctrine. They accuse them of spending all their time on forms and none at all on the actual heart of the gospel. In reality, while the non-institutional churches are more strict in their doctrine in this manner, they are very much interested and focused on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. They are very much aware of faith, of the grace of God, and the blood of Jesus.
In the end, we are all very much alike. We all care very much about the same thing, and we’ve all gotten there through the same biblical means.
We in the mainline are stuck in between the instrument of music and the instituion of education and benevolence. A rock and a hard place. Those on both sides say we are incorrect. One says we are too liberal, one says we are too lax on holiness issues and too strict and arbitary on what we are against.
In the reality, I would hazard to say that neither generalization is correct, at least in its entirety.
-Clarke
——————————————————-
Also: Mom - Happy Birthday! I love you as well…