This is an excerpt of a piece I wrote some time ago that I was moved to post in light of some recent controversies:
The service to the kingdom we are called to places no heavy yolk upon us, as our faithful service, preformed in liberty, is the law of divine love. We have no need of special assemblies as our every gathering is blessed. We have no need of peculiar diets, as there is no food unclean to us. We have no need of special garments, as virtuous acts are our robes. We have no need holy days or Sabbaths as every day we live is holy and a Sabbath in Christ Jesus our Lord. We have no need of perpetual fasts, rites, or rituals, as the whole of our lives are acts of worship and living sacrifices. We have no need of sacred sites or pilgrimages as wherever we set foot is holy ground. We have no need of a temple, as the holy spirit of God dwells within us. We need only to love God, to love our neighbor, and to thankfully receive those things that God supplies in Jesus name.
What is the inspiration for a theology that seeks to do only the bare minimum one can get away with? If I believe that Christ will forgive me for not attending Church, this means I am better off not doing so? If God demands no dietary restrictions, this means there is no spiritual benefit in the discipline of fasting? If God accept the poor coming to Church in rags, this means that the well-off ought not show respect? If we lived as a monk, with everyday as a worshipful Sabbath, then there would be no need for designated times of worship. But do we? Do we? If we do none of the above, on the mere grounds that God has not demanded it, then in what sense are ‘the whole of our lives are acts of worship and living sacrifices’, if we never worship and will not sacrifice?
I have had my fill enough with what is ‘needed’. I want to deepen my relationship with Him, and if that means fasting, ritual, obedience to a Church, and so on, then I welcome it with open arms.
You are confusing my statement. Nowhere did I indicate that ritual acts of worship are without benefit; any worship to the glory of God is beneficial, but it needs to be spirit born and done with joy, not legalistic requirement. Christians are in a unique position in being so free. This freedom enables us to joyfully commit ourselves as “living sacrifices” that do what we do as children serving a parent out of love rather than slave serving a master out of compulsion.
First, I don’t see why the two contradict. One can joyfully do what is required of them. Second, I disagree with your statement because obedience is a virtue as well- doing what one feels is required of him out of sense of discipline or duty is absolutely a part of the virtuous Christian life. Yes, it would be great if we always cheerfully did what we should without having to be told or compelled, but that’s just not reality.
Now, if one is caught up in Christ’s Church, worshiping God with others, honoring the sacraments and faithfully keeping to the disciplines he has been taught and that have been handed down since the Church Fathers were around, I can think of no Christian virtue that could compel him to stop doing these things. If a Christian is taught it is best to pray at a certain time of day, the reminder that he ‘doesn’t have to’ should in no way dissuade him. As you say, this isn’t about what we must do.
At the same time, if a Christian experiences a ritualized, ‘legalistic’ Church setting with old traditions, old songs, and so on, and it makes him feel closer to God, I can think of no Christian virtue that would compel him to avoid it, so long as it is an authentically Christian experience and not some modern invention.
Last but not least, if the sort of Christianity you’re criticizing is the way it’s always been done in most places by most people since the time of Paul or so, I can think of no Christian virtue that could compel one to tear it down.
What you seem to be missing is that such things are ancillary, not essential. I’m not criticizing what others of the faith have done (or do for that matter), but I am criticizing the idea that they, and others, must do such things in order to be “good Christians”. Matters of tradition are training wheels for ones faith and serve as a bonding agent for the community, however, they are not at the heart one ones service to God. In point of fact, Christ himself repudiated the Pharisees for placing a greater emphasis on their traditions than on the law of God. Our freedom is one of the things that sets the Christian faith apart, and it’s a sad irony that so many have exchanged that freedom for a renewed bondage to mere ritual, holy days, holy places, so-called mediators (e.g. priests), and the like. We ought to celebrate our common salvation in Christ and not weigh one another down with fruitless burdens and empty disputations. As Paul wrote in Romans, “Then let us no longer judge one another, but rather resolve never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother.†My post was simply meant to remind people that the heart of Christ is love, and that where the Spirit is freedom is also.
JVS
Pertinent verses:
Mark 2:27 Jesus said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.
Mark 7:19 because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.)
Romans 14:3 The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him.
Romans 14:5 One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind.
Romans 14:17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.
Colossians 2:16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day
Hebrews 9:10 since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation.
1 Tim. 2:5 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
Yes, I see now. The notion that these things are ancillary and not essential is a modern invention (modern in terms of how the Church reckons history, anyways). Christianity didn't begin with that notion, and it didn't adhere to that notion for well over 1000 years after it's inception. Paul baptized and appointed Bishops. So, you may be right in what you're teaching here, but it's not any sort of freedom, it's an obedience to Protestant dogmas- and not even original Protestantism, which was Liturgical. You're essentially saying that the phenomenon of Church practice that sprang up pretty much in the Protestant United States is the true attitude of Christianity.
He also said “Do this in remembrance of Me”. Christ chastised the Pharisees for abusing the traditions for their own personal gains, He had nothing bad to say about tradition in itself. Indeed, He established the Church.
Ah. I think you need to make up your mind whether you are criticizing these things, or not. Again, ritual, holy days, holy places, and mediators have been there since the New Testament when the apostles established all these things. If you find them to be a bondage, then that's YOU, not Scripture. You seem to be trying to justify the sort of Christian life that makes [i]you[/i] feel most free at the expense of what the Church has always been. For my part, the nearest church of the sect I believe to be the most correct is several hundred miles away from me. I cannot participate in the rituals, the holy days, and all these other things. Worshipping in my small apartment all alone is what feels like bondage.
Don’t you have a denomination? I know there are plenty that support what you say. What are these criticisms of yours but ‘empty disputations’ of another Church’s way of doing things that you aren’t compelled to follow?
The Sabbath was made for man. So then keep it holy. It is not nothing.
Jesus gives instructions on how to properly fast in the Sermon on the Mount, saying not to be of sad countenance, but to clean yourself up and not look like you’re fasting at all, if possible. Never once does He say not to do it.
Your own quotation of Romans 14:5 removes your grounds from criticism- it puts the people who view one day as above another, and the people who view all days as equal on the same ground. Your (non)tradition and more dogmatic tradition are presented as equals in this narrow verse.
The Book of Acts refers to early Church services as being ritualized and liturgical over and over again. 2:42, 13:2, and otherwise. All of Paul’s letters are concerning organized Churches and disputes over their organized practices, which have been in place since nearly the beginning.
So again, this is not to say that you’re wrong in your criticism. I’m just saying, it’s not historical and it’s not Scriptural. It may well be that Christendom has been wrong all along, and that a personal non-Church in the spirit of American Individualism is the most accurate way to practice Christianity. You can probably tell that I have my doubts, though.
And again, I agree with you that there is no need of a human mediator between Christ and man.
Oh…you must be a Roman Catholic. I myself don’t belong to any particular denomination - I’m for the whole currency of Christ. Catholicism has a number of enchanting points to it; it’s wonderful architecture, beautiful music, and somber liturgical practices are quite right for the removing of ones thoughts from the profane to the sacred. The Eastern Orthodox Church holds many of the same charms. It would, of course, be denominational suicide for a Roman Catholic to subscribe to many of the points I put forward in my original post. Traditions are important for any religious community. Yu Tzu, a student of Confucius said, “Of the things brought about by rites, harmony is the most valuable”, and I would tend to agree. One must only keep in mind that as it relates to the body of Christ, such things are ‘letter’ and not ‘spirit’. The Catholic and Orthodox traditions make the mistake of being too stiff, hence lacking the dynamic, Spirit-filled quality that freedom and individual input can provide whereas many Protestant traditions make the mistake of being too fluid, hence lacking the benefit that tradition and structure can provide. What is needed is a balance, a synthesis between these two theses. Survey the whole of the Christian tradition, evaluate it’s harvest, gather the wheat, and dispose of the chaff; this is the formula I follow.
Nope! But to be fair, I had the feeling you’d get that impression sooner or later. I notice a disturbing lack of Scriptural or Christian historical references in this most recent post of yours, I found it encouraging that things had started to move in that direction. Again, I’ve no interest in saying that you’re wrong in your approach to Christianity, only that your approach is not Scriptural, and your view of tradition and ritual is not the view that Christians have had in any significant number until the past couple centuries.
I could admire someone doing that, I suppose. At this point in my life, I don't consider myself the man for that job. I don't consider many of the Church's critics to be the men for it either. Better to follow the traditions that came to me along with all more theological teachings, then to pick and choose what to reject on the basis of Uccisore and His Great Wisdom. I come from a Protestant background, and so I've had my fill of making stuff up, or 'giving my individual input', as I've described it in the past. First, I want to know what Christianity really is, what it's always been, and then if some of it needs criticism, and I'm up to the task, we'll see.
I have no religion now but, the crux of christianity to me, should be gift of self for the benifit of all and to the whole. Of course I have found that the belief of mine differs from what is preached in most Christian religions.
Jer, almost has the right of what I feel christianity should be. But, since I willfully disclaim Christian religion and all others I can not be a judge.
Jer, your belief is right on target for you but, it does not have to include others. Shoes come in different sizes for a reason as does knowledge and belief.