Thursday, November 29, 2007
To Whom Are You Attached?
Adrian Warnock reprints an old post about loyalty.
Over the course of my Christian life, particularly when I was younger, I attached myself to various teachers, gurus and institutions that I thought best reflected the glory of God. As the relationship grew, I came to learn that those reflections were at best poor. I have come to think that nothing and no one can do more than poorly reflect God's glory. I think that's scriptural.
There is a risk of this kind of lack of attachment - the risk that lets our loyalty lie wholly in ourselves, and we are probably more disappointing than those we are NOT giving our loyalty to. Loyalty solely to our Lord must be counterbalanced with humility in regards to our capabilities.
Which brings me to a second point. Adrian's primary theme of the post is that blogging is no substitute for a local congregation. He's right about that, but he seems to limit himself to teaching from a local congregation, but a local congregation is so much more than just teaching. A local congregation is community, it is sacrament, it is accountability, it is a reminder of the humility so necessary. All of that can happen apart from the teaching that comes from the church.
Blogging is no substitute for the local church, but it can supplement it.
If one assumes, as I do, that no church is perfect, then one must chose your foibles in a local congregation. It seems to me that if a church has a good community life, there is a least a small group of individuals that I can ask to hold me accountable, and the sacramental practice is sufficient, but the teaching sort of stinks, then blogging is a good supplement. I can read some of the best and the brightest Christian thinking in blogging. I can access the sermons of some of the best preachers out there.
Yeah, I think blogging makes a great supplement.
Technorati Tags:teaching, local conggregation, loyalty, submission, church
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator
You can also be too loyal by being too trusting of someone, and by following them too closely. I strongly hope that I don't have any readers who read this blog uncritically; that would be foolish in the extreme. In real life I could be anyone. No matter how well you feel you know me from my blog writings, it's not possible to deduce the answers to all kinds of really important questions. Am I a Christian in good standing in a local church? Do I have the appropriate level of biblical understanding to support what I say? What is my character like? Do I treat my wife and children as well as I ought to? What theological degrees or qualifications do I have? I will give you the answer to that last question only—NONE!There is actually a whole lot in this piece of Adrian's worthy of comment and discussion, but I want to address myself to just two things. First the idea of loyalty itself and secondly a relationship with the local church.
It worries me a little that some readers of blogs look to those blogs for their teaching more than their own local church. Some might even feel that they do not need to go to a church, partly because of the biblical food they feel they are getting online. The challenge for some, no doubt, is that they attend a church whose teaching they believe is not biblically sound. There are definitely many Christians who continue, out of a misguided sense of loyalty, attending churches they believe teach blatant error. To listen to online teachers and get one's teaching there may seem wise when you feel that your local preacher is in some way deficient.
Over the course of my Christian life, particularly when I was younger, I attached myself to various teachers, gurus and institutions that I thought best reflected the glory of God. As the relationship grew, I came to learn that those reflections were at best poor. I have come to think that nothing and no one can do more than poorly reflect God's glory. I think that's scriptural.
1 Cor 13:12 - For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I shall know fully just as I also have been fully known.Our only loyalty must be to the Lord, earthly institutions and teachers have something to teach us, but there are also areas where they will disappoint - that is simply a fact of living in the "already, not yet."
There is a risk of this kind of lack of attachment - the risk that lets our loyalty lie wholly in ourselves, and we are probably more disappointing than those we are NOT giving our loyalty to. Loyalty solely to our Lord must be counterbalanced with humility in regards to our capabilities.
Which brings me to a second point. Adrian's primary theme of the post is that blogging is no substitute for a local congregation. He's right about that, but he seems to limit himself to teaching from a local congregation, but a local congregation is so much more than just teaching. A local congregation is community, it is sacrament, it is accountability, it is a reminder of the humility so necessary. All of that can happen apart from the teaching that comes from the church.
Blogging is no substitute for the local church, but it can supplement it.
If one assumes, as I do, that no church is perfect, then one must chose your foibles in a local congregation. It seems to me that if a church has a good community life, there is a least a small group of individuals that I can ask to hold me accountable, and the sacramental practice is sufficient, but the teaching sort of stinks, then blogging is a good supplement. I can read some of the best and the brightest Christian thinking in blogging. I can access the sermons of some of the best preachers out there.
Yeah, I think blogging makes a great supplement.
Technorati Tags:teaching, local conggregation, loyalty, submission, church
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator
