Christian Unity, Epilog

There are some who apparently feel that my last installment on Christian Unity was a bit too harsh. Perhaps they are right. Sarcasm is a tricky tool to wield, not unlike a chainsaw. In skilled hands such a device can turn a dead tree into an artsy totem pole or a statue of a grizzly bear; in the hands of an amateur it usually results in a sudden trip to the emergency room.

By way of apology let me state that my articles on Christian Unity have not come from some smug, triumphal attitude, though they would be easy enough to mischaracterize as such. In truth, I have been deeply concerned about Christian Unity, or should I say the lack of it, since long before I had even heard of Eastern Orthodoxy.

When I first came to Christ as an Evangelical Christian, I was told that the bible was our sole remaining link to the “early church” of the apostles. When I asked what had happened to that church, I was told that it had quickly fallen under pagan influence and apostatized, but that God had preserved the bible so that we could recreate the early church experience with each new generation. I was assured that the bible was the infallible word of God zealously preserved by Him, despite the fact that He had allowed His earthly church to collapse like a house of cards without apparent concern.

In time I learned that many diverse groups held to this same view of a general apostasy of the church, along with the idea that the bible was its only surviving relic. The Mormons, the JWs, the Baptists, the Quakers, Herbert W. Armstrong, and Chuck Smith to name but a few, all seemed to teach the same thing, though each held to entirely different interpretations of the bible and routinely pronounced one another as heretics. Even within Evangelicalism there seemed to be as many different takes on what Christianity should be or should emphasize as there were individuals with bibles. I soon found that even within one single church there would commonly exist a multitude of opinions about how this or that portion of the scriptures should be interpreted, and if the disagreements became sharp enough, division was the normal, even expected solution.

I’m not sure I could have told you why back then, but this troubled me greatly. While claiming to exalt the bible, we Evangelicals often used it almost as our private plaything, each of us cheerfully laying out our own individual set of doctrinal positions to distinguish ourselves as mature believers. We delighted in such practices, defended our “right” to follow our own consciences and hold to our own views, and looked with deep suspicion upon any group which enjoyed a uniformity of belief. Division was the norm for us, almost the authentication of ourselves as true, bible-believing Christians. The height of Christian virtue in our eyes was not reconciliation with an opposing brother, but a willingness “to agree to disagree” with him while maintaining our respective beliefs. Our independent views had to be preserved at any cost. Some Evangelicals have even suggested that the division of Christendom is a good thing, because so many conflicting and competing denominations keep the bible from becoming the exclusive property of only one church, which presumably would be a bad thing, though it wouldn’t necessarily have to be.

Many will point out that Orthodox Christians are by no means immune from such human failings and this is certainly true. Our humanity is just as fallen and subject to sins as anyone else’s, and our tendency to stretch the very boundaries of our communion nearly to the breaking point and perhaps just a bit beyond is well documented. But there are a few fundamental differences regarding our experience. First of all, the Orthodox Church alone is not born of schism, but remains the “early church” of the apostles, grown up. Second, we do not institutionalize division, applaud it, or excuse it, but indeed hold it to be a terrible sin in violation of God’s expressed will. Some will question the sincerity of that position, given the slowness of the various ethnic jurisdictions in America to unite with one another in common leadership, vision, and purpose. Yet we are still in communion with one another for the most part, and many Orthodox Christians know that unity must and will happen over any and all human objections to it if this is indeed God’s Church.

My intention in this series of articles was not present Orthodoxy as immune from all human failings, but to present it as mankind’s last, best hope to be one in Christ, even as the Father and the Son are one. We ourselves are far from perfect, and are most often the unworthy recipients of whatever grace that God bestows upon us. Yet for those like myself who have been “wounded” by this idea that God truly cares about the unity of Christians, let me say that I can think of no better place to work toward that goal than from within the communion of God’s historic Church, founded by Christ upon the faith and life entrusted to the apostles.

And so, my great “Chainsaw of Sarcasm” has been safely locked back up in the toolshed for now, at least until the doctor can remove my bandages. Thanks for reading.