Essay 143
(9-29-06)
FUTURE OF
CHURCHES OF CHRIST
(Al Maxey, who writes provocative and
resourceful essays on the Internet, plans to do a series on the future of
Churches of Christ. He asked me, along with other of his readers, to submit
our observations on this subject. Once I did so, I decided you might be
interested in what I had to say.)
Here are a few observations on how I see
the future of our people in Churches of Christ, along with some of my
concerns. This should be seen in the backdrop of a changing world, and that
all denominations are in a state of transition. So, any problems or
possibilities that we have are not unique to us. The jury is still out on
what "the church of tomorrow" will be like.
As has been the case in recent years, I believe the Churches of Christ
will continue to outgrow and reject their sectarian past, though there will
continue to be a substantial minority of congregations that will react
against this change, and they will preserve our sectarian posture of past
generations. We will have a substantial right wing, but a less substantial
radical right wing. Sects and factions, if they do not progress, tend
to have their day and pass on. I do not, however, see any further divisions
or open splits, except that our far right wing will have little or no
contact with the rest. But we will have "conservatives" and "liberals" -- as
all denominations have -- and hopefully with some semblance of unity.
We will continue to become more grace-centered, more ecumenical
(fellowship with other churches), more concerned for social issues and world
problems, and a more compassionate, loving and caring people. Yes, "a
cruciformed church," as some have put it, Spirit-filled and Cross-conscious.
We will increasingly become the Christlike people that we were called to be,
both by Scripture and by our Stone-Campbell heritage.
We have already begun to exemplify once more the thesis of H. Richard
Niebuhr -- that new churches over time generally move from sect to
denomination. While we will for sometime yet avoid the word denomination, we
will de facto accept that we are a denomination, and will therefore
be more inclined to create agencies in order to function more effectively.
We will then have more cooperation among our congregations and a more
pragmatic and realistic polity.
But as our heritage would have us, we
must be "a denomination in protest" looking to the time when all sects and
denominations can say with our pioneers, "Let this body die, be dissolved,
and sink into union with the body of Christ at large."
We will view evangelism more in terms of reaching the "unchurched" rather
than converting members of other churches. We will at last be hopefully --
what our heritage has called us to be Christians only, but not the only
Christians.
While instrumental music is already a
dead issue in terms of being a test of fellowship, we will for the
foreseeable future continue to be acappella. And yet the instances of
congregations using instruments for "special" occasions such as a Saturday
service will increase. The more progressive churches will have wedding
chapels with instruments.
I suspect we will always preserve
some acappella tradition, for it is such a grand tradition and it works well
for us. There are a few congregations that have become completely
instrumental, at least for one Sunday service, and are still Churches of
Christ. Their number will likely grow, but very gradually.
But I have concerns for the future. Some of the changes, or lack of
change, already evident, trouble me:
(1) In the past we virtually ignored our roots in Stone/Campbell. We were
"the true restored church," so we ignored the intervening centuries. In
recent decades we have made monumental progress in overcoming our
ahistorical mindset. But in our "progress" there are signs of rootlessness,
such as some congregations opting to drop the name "Church of Christ" in
their resolve to escape our sectarian past. In doing this they also divorce
themselves from those Restoration principles that called us into being. We
should seek to be what we believe a Christ-centered, Spirit-filled Church of
Christ should be. We may deny who we are but we cant change who we are. We
can be what our heritage has called us to be part of the one, holy,
catholic, and apostolic church and we can meaningfully do that as Churches
of Christ.
(2) I'm concerned that we might not be the biblically responsible and
resourceful people that both Scripture and our heritage call us to be-- a
biblically-centered people. We should allow no people to be more biblical
than ourselves. We must resist the temptation to give people what they think
they want rather than giving them what we know they need. We must rely on
the power of the gospel rather than fads and gimmicks, and be wary of
"principles of church growth." We are to be the body of Christ, not an
entertainment center. We are called to be faithful, not "successful." If it
comes to that, we should not fear being the "little flock" to which our Lord
referred.
(3) I see no danger in our becoming fundamentalists, which would be
tragic, but we might be tempted to become "evangelicals" -- or join the
evangelicals, if they would have us, as some would have us do. Our heritage
again -- we should be simply Christians, "Christians only" and nothing else.
That is our historic call for unity. We can all be just Christians. The
evangelicals generally do not believe the unique Restoration principles
basic to our heritage.
(4) I'm concerned that the two ordinances -- baptism and Lord's supper --
that go far in identifying our unique heritage will slip in significance.
Our more progressive congregations seldom refer to baptism anymore, and
Communion is hurried through rather than being central. We must develop a
more responsible theology of both of these ordinances.
(5) While I am persuaded that we will in time become less male-dominated
in our assemblies, I am concerned that we are so slow -- perhaps more than
any other church -- in giving women their equal place in ministry. This is
usually the case even in our more progressive congregations where 60% of the
members still have no leadership role in the assembly, not even of the
humblest sort, such as serving Communion or leading a prayer.
(6) While I rejoice in our numerous efforts toward internal unity in our
Restoration tradition, I am concerned that the Disciples of Christ, the
parent group of our Movement, are sometimes excluded. When they are included
such as in the Stone-Campbell Dialogue and the publication of the
monumental Stone-Campbell Encyclopedia their contributions are
significant. If they are "the liberals" among us, that is all the more
reason to reach out and include, for we are more like Christ when we include
those to our left. It is easy to embrace those to our right. Tax collectors,
prostitutes, sinners, the marginalized, and the liberals are to our left.
Those like us some more so are to our right. We of course are in the
center!
But overall I am an optimist about our future. Churches of Christ are
poised for a great destiny, just as they have a great heritage. This will
come mostly through leadership in the congregations themselves, which is the
way it should be. This is our great challenge, for each congregation, in its
own unique way, to be "the body of Christ in that place."
[TOP].
|