Category: THE CHURCH

This quote from Kung cited earlier is an example of one those threads: “… the salvific act in Jesus Christ is the origin of the Church; but it is more than the starting point or the first phase of its history, it is something which at any given time determine the whole history of the Church and defines its essential nature.”
The restoration movement, which is my heritage, marked the Day of Pentecost as the origin of the church. The NT book of Acts was the blueprint for the church, particularly 2:38-47. ( I wrote a post about my church heritage. You can read it HERE.) The Day of Pentecost as the church’s origin shaped our ecclesiology profoundly. For example, the book of acts was the primary resource for teaching and preaching. The rest of New Testament was relevant but clearly secondary. The four Gospels were admired but were mostly for devotional reading while the important work was done in the instruction manual, Acts, and the apostle Paul’s epistles. Cornerstones of true church’s buildings were engraved with “Established AD 33″. The Old Testament was irrelevant to ecclesiology. I remember the distribution of handy little —”The New Testament and Psalms ” — Bibles. The endgame was getting church right, everything else became a means to that end.

Perhaps you find what I described above as troubling as I do. However, I suggest that premise is widely held in western Christianity and shapes perceptions about what church is and should look like. There are many variations but at the core is Pentecost. It seems to me, more than ever, the endgame is getting church right. It is for that reason, I find Kung’s declaration : — “…the Church is headed in the right direction when, whatever the age in which it lives, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is its criterion.” — an important shift from getting church “right” to embracing the origin of the church as “God’s salvific act in Jesus Christ”, a concrete reality in which the essence of Church — real church is found.

It is difficult, maybe impossible, to set aside preconceived notions of church and reimagine church. Perhaps some Sunday school “desert island” speculation could be helpful.

What if ?, there were 200 God believers on a desert island, born and raised with no contact with the outside world, except for a bottle that washed up on the beach which contained the following note:
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life; he has rescued you from the dominion of darkness and brought you all into the kingdom of the Son he loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.”
Limited to a single statement of God’s salvific act in his Son, what would their ecclesiology be?
As with most “desert island” questions, its improbably tempts one to discount any relevance, but if the origin of the church is God’s salvific act in Jesus Christ, it seems to be a good starting point on the path to discovering real church.

At this point, I say, with reasonable confidence, that their life and community would be characterized primarily by what Good News produces — gratitude .

Still on the journey.

This post continues thoughts on Real Church. Read the previous post HERE.

I am resolved that my pursuit of “real church” will be one of discovery and I will resist my compelling need to explain. As Crabb concludes: “The passion to explain leads us along a path that ends badly.” 

My responsibility is to know I reside on a continuum between an idealized church and the real church. My mission is to discover and surrender to the will of God for His gathered people, in that pilgrimage the real church will come forth.

I remain committed to the statements from the previous Real Church post. However, three weeks since writing that post, struggling with the idea of real church, I realize just how much of a challenge, perhaps impossibility, it is to set aside my idealized abstractions about church and discover real church. That understanding is important, otherwise my pursuit will only lead me to confirm my idealized abstractions. I have no illusion that I will discover “the” real church, but I do believe I can move closer to real church.
Although I am not a theologian,Kung was encouraging
“…the theologian learns by his mistakes and that if he is prevented from making any, he is prevented from constructive thinking; that it takes time not only to find the truth but also for the truth to take effect in the Church generally, in the face of innumerable obstacles, of the prejudices and pretexts of an opinion communis which masquerades as genuine doctrine.”
My hope is for —constructive thinking , some truth regarding real church and patience for truth to take effect.

Returning to Hans Kung’s book “THE CHURCH”, I believe he is helpful in creating a starting point to pursue real church. Here are some citations:

Rather than talking about an ideal Church situated in the abstract celestial spheres of theological theory, we shall consider the real Church as it exists in our world, and in human history. The New Testament itself does not begin by laying down a doctrine of the Church which has then to be worked out in practice; it starts with the Church as reality, and reflection upon it comes later. The real Church is first and foremost a happening, a fact, an historical event. The real essence of the of the real Church is expressed in historical form.

The “essential nature” of the Church is not to be found in some unchanging Platonic haven of ideas, but only in the history of the Church. The real Church not only has a history , it exists by having a history. There’s is no “doctrine” of the Church in the sense of an unalterable metaphysical and ontological system, but one which is historically conditioned , within the framework of the history of the Church, its dogmas and its theology.

God’s salvific act in Jesus Christ is the origin of the Church; but it is more than the starting point or the first phase of its history, it is something which at any given time determine the whole history of the Church and defines its essential nature.

For those who believe the Church is headed in the wrong direction. Kung poses an essential question “…by what criterion are we to judge that the Church is headed in the right direction?” I believe the starting point to determine criterion by which to judge is understanding the essence of the Church. Paraphrasing Kung, the essence of real Church is found in its origin, a happening, a fact, a reality — namely, God’s salvific act in Jesus Christ.

“It [the Church] stand or falls by its links with its origins in Jesus and its message ; it remains permanently dependent for the ground of of its existence, on God’s saving act in Jesus Christ, which is valid for all time and so also in the present.”

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,
1 Corinthians 15:3-4 – NIV

The Church must constantly reflect upon its real existence in the present with reference to its origins in the past, in order to assure its existence in the future.

Kung

Pursuing “real church” begins with an assessment of a church’s loyalty to the essential nature (essence) of “real church”, a church that is …committing itself to each new day afresh, accepting the changes and transformations of history and human life, constantly willing to reform, to renew, and rethink.”

Concluding the essence of real church originates in the reality of God’s saving act in Jesus Christ is a game changer for me. When I consider that the Day of Pentecost is when I have believed the church was established, there are profound implications. My idealistic, abstract notions of church as described on the day of Pentecost are inadequate criterion to judge a church’s loyalty to the essential nature of real church.

As Kung states, a concern that the church is headed in the wrong direction must be taken seriously. The vital question is… by what criterion are we to judge that the Church is now headed in the right direction?
Answering first in the negative, he comments, …the Church is not on the right path so long as it adapts itself to the present; nor is it on the right path as long as it holds fast to the past.
How do we know the Church is on the right path? — … the Church is headed in the right direction when, whatever the age in which it lives, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is its criterion..

Well at least that narrows it down —real church is not adapting to the present nor is it holding to the past — now all I need to do to find real church whose criterion is the Gospel of Jesus Christ!
In the next post, I intend to wrestle with what a church looks like whose criterion is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.