Finding Peace, Unity, and Purity

in Christ: Part 2

1 Corinthians 1:10-18                                                   Rev. Todd B. Freeman

Bethany Presbyterian Church, Dallas                                   January 30, 2005

Since this is the second part of a sermon that began last Sunday, let me begin with a bit of a recap, especially for those of you who were not here.

We looked at how quarrels and divisions within the Christian church is a phenomenon that was just as alive as well in those ancient congregations, like the one in Corinth, Greece, as they are today. We explored how the diverse and pluralistic nature of that ancient city, a nature exhibited even within that congregation itself, affected their ability to live in harmony and unity. In just a moment we’ll take a look at what seemed to be at the heart of their differences.

At the heart of Paul’s letter to the Corinthian church was the issue and question: how can they find unity amidst their diversity? This ancient Corinthian question has become our modern question. How can we find unity amidst our diversity as Christians throughout the world, as Presbyterians in this country, as a congregation in this city?

The issue of how we can continue to live together as a denomination in the face of our differences is a primary question being addressed by a national level Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church. They have been working for over 3 years, and have another year and a half to go, to help “lead the Presbyterian Church (USA) in spiritual discernment of our Christian identity in and for the 21st century... seeking the peace, purity and unity of the church.”

Following a recommendation by the Task Force that all presbyteries form local conversation groups to follow a similar process of open dialogue and active listening (which was unanimously approved by last year’s General Assembly, of which I was a Commissioner), Grace Presbytery has established a Peace, Unity, and Purity Planning Team (of which I am a member along with 5 others), to implement this recommendation.

Yesterday, with the help and encouragement of the Moderator of the General Assembly, Rich Ufford-Chase, an elder from Arizona, we held a training session for those who have volunteered to serve as Conversation Leaders and form Conversation Groups throughout the Presbytery.

The stated goal for these groups is to “build respectful, trusting relationships among persons with varied perspectives and views, even on the most controversial subjects.” It is not a “win people over to our side” approach, because we believe that will ultimately be fruitless. We hope that the conversations will be more heart-based than head-based. If we can learn to respect our differences within the Presbyterian denomination, with mutual forbearance, then we will truly be learning how to “do church in a new and different way.”

Last Sunday I informed you that I will be trying to ascertain whether there is interest here in this congregation in forming a Conversation Group, that will meet ever 4-6 weeks for the next year. My hope is that there will be interest, especially in forming a group in conjunction with another congregation with a different theological perspective than our own.

I want to return, now, to what biblical scholars think was going on in that ancient Corinthian congregation. Paul writes that he has heard directly from “Chloe’s people” (unfortunately we don’t know anything more about Chloe or her people than this one mention of her name), that there had been disruptive quarrels among members of that congregation.

The exact nature of the dissension and divisions within that Christian community remains a matter of debate. But Paul’s reference to various leaders suggests that factions had aligned themselves around key personalities and the particular emphasis of their teachings.

Paul writes, “Each of you says, ‘I belong to Paul, or ‘I belong to Apollos,’ or ‘I belong to Cephas’ (who is Peter), or ‘I belong to Christ.’”

Let’s look at these four leaders and the factions that followed them.  Paul, of course, started the Christian movement in Corinth and was their first teacher. Those loyal to Paul were most likely the charter members of the church, the long-term members. Due to their longevity, they most likely felt that they held a position of privilege with it came to church leadership.

Apollos was the preacher and teacher who replaced Paul.  He was an eloquent orator, highly knowledgeable in the Scriptures, and considered to be very wise. Those in Corinth converted out of a background in Greek philosophy and academia would be naturally drawn to Apollos. These were the folks who wanted to intellectualize Christianity.

Those who claimed that they belonged to Cephas (Peter) were probably the traditionalists in the church, most likely the Jewish Christians. Members of this group were probably not too comfortable with the Gentile members who had been converted out of paganism, and who paid no attention to Jewish history, tradition, and culture. These folks probably embraced a much more conservative, legalistic approach to living the Christian life.

Now, we need to remember that these three men, Paul, Apollos, and Peter, basically agreed in their theology. They weren’t competing with each other. The problem was with the Corinthians who had rallied around one or another of these leaders because of his particular style, personality, or unique emphasis of Christianity.

The fourth party was named the Christ party. These were the purists, those who believed themselves to be the most spiritual. It was probably the most divisive of the four parties. They basically said, “We don’t need a human leader at all. Jesus is the head of the body, and we’ll just listen to him.” Some biblical scholars believe that these folks were spiritual elitists with a bit of self-righteous smugness, who were unwilling to submit themselves even to the apostolic authority that Jesus himself had defined and put in place for the church.

As I described these various cliques and factions I’m sure that you have been able to recognize parallels throughout many typical congregations today: the original or long-time members, the intellectuals, the conservative traditionalists, and the spiritual elitists.

If Paul were alive today, I’m sure he’d write to the Christian church and say that he’d heard comments like, “I belong to Luther,” or “I belong to Calvin,” or “I belong to the Pope,” or “I belong to Billy Graham,” or “I belong to Jerry Falwell.” And even within each denomination can’t we see ourselves as aligned with, for example, progressive social activists or conservative evangelicals, traditionalists or feminists, denominational leaders or local charismatic figures?

Christians today are divided by the same problems that divided the Corinthian church. It seems to be built into our human nature to pick a side and then defend it (hopefully not to the death).

Paul grounds his argument in the theological claim that the church’s unity can only stem from its center, Jesus Christ. The problem, as defined by Paul, is when we focus on individual leaders or styles or theologies and not on Christ. 

One pastor writes, “Personality cults, then and now, always divide people into ‘us’ and ‘them;’ ‘we’ and ‘they.’ We are always right, they are always wrong; we are superior, they are inferior.  Personality cults lead people to worship a particular person [or theological viewpoint] rather than worshiping Christ. Personality cults cause people to worship the creature rather than the Creator.”

Not only is this a true statement, I believe that we are all guilty to one extent or another.

I have a daily devotional book called, “The Soul’s Almanac: a Year of Interfaith Stories, Prayers & Wisdom.” The entry for January 19 deals with this issue of unity. After several short readings from a variety of faith traditions there comes the following contemplation. It asks, “Everybody wants unity, or do we? The often excruciating discipline, the extraordinary necessity to relinquish prejudice and alienation, the requisite will to abandon habit and embrace obedience to the call to oneness - these are daunting to us.”

Again, how true. But we must start somewhere, sometime. Perhaps it’s time for us to form a Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church Conversation Group. For no one Christian, no single denomination or congregation within a denomination has the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth! Every Christian, every denomination, every congregation, including ours, has their strengths AND their weaknesses; their truths AND their prejudices!

Perhaps through true and open dialogue we can discover, respect, and even accept one another without having to “convert” others to “our way.” For in Christ, we are equals, yet different - that’s what makes us the Body of Christ. Perhaps it is our very differences, our diversity, that are the real treasures and gifts we can offer each other and the world.

Moderator Rick Ufford-Chase shared his hope that by entering into conversation we can end up making two affirmations concerning others who differ from us.

The first affirmation toward others is, ‘I love you,’ because that is what Jesus calls us to do. For ultimately, love trumps everything else. The second affirmation is perhaps even harder, ‘I might be wrong.’ For after all, God is not done with any of us yet! Thank God!

Amen.