Jeffrey, I strongly agree with much that you’ve said in this post, especially your Biblical references on the need for strong Christian unity within the Body of Christ. But I believe that you and I operate under a different meaning of the word, denomination. I understand that term to be synonymous with sect, or tribe. As such, this term, in my opinion would be in total contradiction to what Christ prayed for in John 17:20-23, or what Paul wrote about in Ephesians 4:1-6. What you have stated about all the GMC local churches being in a covenant relationship together, I would say that Biblically speaking, all the orthodox local churches within a town or city should be in that same type of relationship. For instance, the epistles were all addressed to THE church at ———, even though there would have been multiple house churches meeting in that same city or town. As to oversight, there were itinerant apostolic workers who performed that function, now bishop? As for “independent churches “, I can’t find any such animal in the NT. They were all interdependent, all connected to one another through their union into Christ. Full disclosure: Although I’m currently serving as the adult SS facilitator, and have for a decade, at a now local GMC congregation, I still identify as post-denominational. I also advocate for small group meetings to facilitate discipleship and accountability. I believe lacking that, successfully for those goals are next to impossible.
I don't know how much you and I actually disagree. I don't really like denominations. I understand the biblical vision to be that all local churches are interconnected in the ways you describe here, sharing common doctrine, authority, and finances. Given that doctrinal differences, significant ones exist, we have no option but to create networks of churches that share with one another in the ways that the church universal should expect. I'm concerned about churches that don't share doctrine, authority structure, and budget with other local churches. I have no loyalty to the word 'denomination,' nor to the 20th century mainline framework that became normal in the 20th century around denominationalism. I would rather that we enter a time of different doctrinal and ecclesiastic families reexamining their roots and then resuming the effort to recreate the true, eternal, early church. I think that can only be done in earnest by reclaiming our heritage. But I would love it if there weren't a future with Methodists, Baptists, Anglicans, Presbyterians, Lutherans, etc...but only Christians. That would be great, but only insofar as the name 'Christian' means something significant and corresponding 1:1 with what we find in our bibles. How we can get there, or work towards such a thing, is the question. I can join hands with lots of folks aiming in the same direction. I don't understand folks who say they love Jesus and yet refuse to aim in that direction, who sit in their silos, unbothered by their separation from other believers. They say they are connected, but without those verifiable external markers, I just can't take that as seriously as they do...
First of all, I do truly appreciate that the fact that you’ve taken the time and effort to reply to my comment. Additionally, I also believe that we’re really not that far apart in what we desire for the Ekklesia to become. I strongly believe that the reason that so many denominations exist are twofold. One is simply human pride in what we’ve accomplished. Next is the fact that we’ve been doing “church” this way for so long that we’ve dulled our hearts to see how far we’ve strayed from Christ’s purpose for birthing his Ekklesia. I’m convinced that any true ecumenical movement will have to be Spirit empowered and Spirit led from a grassroots level. If you’ve never read it, I suggest you read a book entitled Pagan Christianity, co-authored by Frank Viola and George Barna. It goes into great detail as how the Church evolved into its current form from the post Apostolic era. I can appreciate why Wesley was somewhat of a restorationist for primitive Christianity. I believe that part of our prayers for the next Great Awakening must include a petition for Christ to restore the unity that was portrayed by the early Church in the book of Acts. Again, thank you for your gracious response to my comment. Blessings.
1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 New King James Version (NKJV)
Test all things; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil.
In 1947, following WWII, a number of Spaniards who had fought in the war approached Father Eduardo Boudin and informed him that the traditional Catholic services were not dishing out what they were seeking. Father Boudin created a three-day short-course on Christianity and named it Cursillo, or, short-course. In it, 15 talks were given, 10 by lay & 5 by Clergy. The first talk is on the topic of Priority. Cursillo took off & reinvigorated a stoic Catholic Church; it grew & spread.
In 1957, Spanish Airmen - training in San Antonio, Tx., introduced Cursillo to America.
In 1976, some Methodist Ministers/Professors modified Cursillo, modified the 15 talks and working under the Upper Room in Nashville and gave it a new name: The Walk to Emmaus (Luke 24:13) in which they “recognized the risen Christ with His breaking of the bread.” The 14th talk of an Emmaus weekend describes Wesley’s Bands and the need for small group accountability. The Walk to Emmaus continues to encourage sponsors of Pilgrims to get their Pilgrims into a “Reunion Group” that meets regularly and follows the steps laid out on a reunion group card they are given.
Satan/Covid did much to slow/stop the momentum that Emmaus had - worldwide - in the mid-teens. Until Rev. Dr. Kevin Watson began lecturing & writing about Wesley’s Bands, the Emmaus Reunion Group was the only formal Methodist “glue” that has carried accountability into the 21st Century. So yes, Jeffrey, time for the GMC to be an invigorated Faith!
“Submit to each other in reverence to Christ” is an idea that has gone way out of style but is absolutely required to be in a Connectional polity.
Jeffrey, I strongly agree with much that you’ve said in this post, especially your Biblical references on the need for strong Christian unity within the Body of Christ. But I believe that you and I operate under a different meaning of the word, denomination. I understand that term to be synonymous with sect, or tribe. As such, this term, in my opinion would be in total contradiction to what Christ prayed for in John 17:20-23, or what Paul wrote about in Ephesians 4:1-6. What you have stated about all the GMC local churches being in a covenant relationship together, I would say that Biblically speaking, all the orthodox local churches within a town or city should be in that same type of relationship. For instance, the epistles were all addressed to THE church at ———, even though there would have been multiple house churches meeting in that same city or town. As to oversight, there were itinerant apostolic workers who performed that function, now bishop? As for “independent churches “, I can’t find any such animal in the NT. They were all interdependent, all connected to one another through their union into Christ. Full disclosure: Although I’m currently serving as the adult SS facilitator, and have for a decade, at a now local GMC congregation, I still identify as post-denominational. I also advocate for small group meetings to facilitate discipleship and accountability. I believe lacking that, successfully for those goals are next to impossible.
I don't know how much you and I actually disagree. I don't really like denominations. I understand the biblical vision to be that all local churches are interconnected in the ways you describe here, sharing common doctrine, authority, and finances. Given that doctrinal differences, significant ones exist, we have no option but to create networks of churches that share with one another in the ways that the church universal should expect. I'm concerned about churches that don't share doctrine, authority structure, and budget with other local churches. I have no loyalty to the word 'denomination,' nor to the 20th century mainline framework that became normal in the 20th century around denominationalism. I would rather that we enter a time of different doctrinal and ecclesiastic families reexamining their roots and then resuming the effort to recreate the true, eternal, early church. I think that can only be done in earnest by reclaiming our heritage. But I would love it if there weren't a future with Methodists, Baptists, Anglicans, Presbyterians, Lutherans, etc...but only Christians. That would be great, but only insofar as the name 'Christian' means something significant and corresponding 1:1 with what we find in our bibles. How we can get there, or work towards such a thing, is the question. I can join hands with lots of folks aiming in the same direction. I don't understand folks who say they love Jesus and yet refuse to aim in that direction, who sit in their silos, unbothered by their separation from other believers. They say they are connected, but without those verifiable external markers, I just can't take that as seriously as they do...
First of all, I do truly appreciate that the fact that you’ve taken the time and effort to reply to my comment. Additionally, I also believe that we’re really not that far apart in what we desire for the Ekklesia to become. I strongly believe that the reason that so many denominations exist are twofold. One is simply human pride in what we’ve accomplished. Next is the fact that we’ve been doing “church” this way for so long that we’ve dulled our hearts to see how far we’ve strayed from Christ’s purpose for birthing his Ekklesia. I’m convinced that any true ecumenical movement will have to be Spirit empowered and Spirit led from a grassroots level. If you’ve never read it, I suggest you read a book entitled Pagan Christianity, co-authored by Frank Viola and George Barna. It goes into great detail as how the Church evolved into its current form from the post Apostolic era. I can appreciate why Wesley was somewhat of a restorationist for primitive Christianity. I believe that part of our prayers for the next Great Awakening must include a petition for Christ to restore the unity that was portrayed by the early Church in the book of Acts. Again, thank you for your gracious response to my comment. Blessings.
1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 New King James Version (NKJV)
Test all things; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil.
In 1947, following WWII, a number of Spaniards who had fought in the war approached Father Eduardo Boudin and informed him that the traditional Catholic services were not dishing out what they were seeking. Father Boudin created a three-day short-course on Christianity and named it Cursillo, or, short-course. In it, 15 talks were given, 10 by lay & 5 by Clergy. The first talk is on the topic of Priority. Cursillo took off & reinvigorated a stoic Catholic Church; it grew & spread.
In 1957, Spanish Airmen - training in San Antonio, Tx., introduced Cursillo to America.
In 1976, some Methodist Ministers/Professors modified Cursillo, modified the 15 talks and working under the Upper Room in Nashville and gave it a new name: The Walk to Emmaus (Luke 24:13) in which they “recognized the risen Christ with His breaking of the bread.” The 14th talk of an Emmaus weekend describes Wesley’s Bands and the need for small group accountability. The Walk to Emmaus continues to encourage sponsors of Pilgrims to get their Pilgrims into a “Reunion Group” that meets regularly and follows the steps laid out on a reunion group card they are given.
Satan/Covid did much to slow/stop the momentum that Emmaus had - worldwide - in the mid-teens. Until Rev. Dr. Kevin Watson began lecturing & writing about Wesley’s Bands, the Emmaus Reunion Group was the only formal Methodist “glue” that has carried accountability into the 21st Century. So yes, Jeffrey, time for the GMC to be an invigorated Faith!