The Error of Church Unity

At the end of the 2008 Lambeth Conference of the Anglican Communion, Archbishop of Canterbury was quoted in the New York Times (August 4, 2008) as saying he was hopeful the expected covenant would help avoid schism. If he is quoted correctly, he said that everyone would be moving along "in step" and the church would be acting more like a church.

That hit me right in the old ecclesiology! That might have worked in the earlier generations, but the church in the 21st century cannot flourish in a a lock-step unity. It's the same error being promoted in my denomination, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Church leaders continue to hold out for unity as a primary value. The Presbyterians require a vow that church leaders will "further the peace, unity and purity of the church." I believe all three of those are off the mark as primary values. This post will deal with "unity."

I take my cues in this matter from an article by Arthur Dewey of Xavier University, "Ecclesial Techtonics" presented to the Westar Institute's National Jesus Seminar in 2004. In Section 11.7, Dewey writes:

• The sense of eccelesial unity ("one" [in the formula "one holy, catholic and apostolic church"]) can no longer be understood as a monolithic adherence to a propositional confession, nor reduced to a litmus test. The reality of human experience brings us to the recognition that unity is discovered in diversity, brought about by genuine human relations. Dialogue not dictate characterizes such unity in diversity. The hierarchical, pyramid of power collapses as a structural principle for church. This sense of inclusive unity agrees with the vision of the historical Jesus who trusted in a God that benefited good and evil, just and unjust. Paul also intimates this unity in the diversity through his understanding of the gifts of the Spirit to the community.

If we can have unity that promotes diversity (as illustrated in the table fellowship of Jesus), that celebrates difference, that allows freedom of choice in belief and practice, then I'm for unity. If unity is created through power, domination, coercion or force, or even through financial obligations, then I'm against it. If we have to sacrifice diversity for the sake of unity, unity has become an error. The church in the 21st century needs to focus on diversity and freedom over unity and purity.

And of course I value your opinion ESPECIALLY if you disagree with me--diversity, you know.