[christianunity] monolithic unity?

Message: < previous - next > : Reply : Subscribe : Cleanse
Home   : August 1998 : Group Archive : Group : All Groups

From: rshepherd@... (Bob & Linda Shepherd)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 20:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
Here's a personal anecdote on perhaps a bit more amusing note.

I once knew a preacher with strong religious right attitudes. He was an 
"ultra" fundamentalist in his convictions, if I can call him that. And he 
admitted that his theology was separatist, in that he rejected association 
and assimilation with "Unity" groups.

He explained that association inevitably led to compromise and syncretism, 
and compromise led to apostasy, and apostasy took you straight to hell.

He was a smart guy, very intelligent. He didn't have a church, but was 
steeped in fundamentalist perspectives, having gotten advanced degrees from 
Bob Jones University, among others.

He opposed the evangelicals (NEA) because they are dominated by Billy Graham 
and his type (liberals?).

He opposed the interdenominational movement because it is dominated by 
mainstream (lukewarm) churches and by the Unitarians and modernists.

He opposed the ecumenical movement because it is dominated by the Catholics 
(and Orthodox?).

He opposed the "Interfaith" movement because it is dominated by liberals and 
"unbelieving" Jews.

Does that make you smile?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Seriously, however, I felt my friend was all too rigid in his thinking. In 
fact, I let him know I disagreed with him. I feel he forgets Jesus' 
admonition to be in the world but not "of" the world. Can't we "associate" 
without "assimilating"?  I am a non-theologian, and I leave that to others, 
but didn't Jesus by example associate with the "undesirables"  and (lots of) 
Galileans -- and even Samaritans. Didn't he give the example (parable) of a 
helping hand ethics -- the Good Samaritan -- as opposed to politically 
correct ideological Scribes and Pharisees.

"Other sheep I have which are not of this fold"

I like the term dialogue.  In the area of religion and conscience, contact 
and communication ought to be a two-way (not one-sided) discussion, a 
respectful exchange of perspectives, an attempt to foster understanding, 
amity, and, on certain issues, at least -- genuine and honest agreement.

Bob Shepherd
upper Sacramento Valley