So far I have been attempting to demonstrate that the apostles’ instructions to the first century churches, as they are recorded in the scriptures, are Christ’s continuing instructions to us, His churches living in the twenty-first century. I believe that this is true even of those traditions that involve merely practical, functional or organizational matters.
Now I am not, at this point, arguing for or against any particular practice in the church. I am not claiming to have anything more than a very murky understanding of this apostolic instruction myself. What I am proposing, however, is that, as faithful churches, seeking to do the will of Christ, we should be striving to understand those teachings and laboring to conform our practices to them.
When questions arise as to how our services should be conducted, how our churches ought to be organized, or how we ought to go about choosing leaders- and even before such questions arise-we should be asking “What did the apostles teach on these matters, and how can we follow their instructions?” The apostolic tradition ought to form the foundation, the entire framework for how we live as Christ’s church in the world, from the most profound doctrines we are to believe, to the most mundane tasks we are to perform.
Again, I believe that to give these teachings secondary consideration, or as more often happens, to ignore them altogether is, in effect, to treat as irrelevant the authoritative commands of our Lord and Savior and to substitute our will and wisdom for His-- a very poor substitution indeed.
3 comments:
i've been reading...and i like so far.
it would probably help if you started working through one or two to give me an idea. i know you said you hadn't, but i'm not exactly sure what you mean:
are you suggesting passages such as head coverings?
are you talking church polity?
to me, those are largely different.
i guess i'm wondering your view between descriptive and prescriptive passages. you haven't said this yet, but are suggesting that if we see something done in a certain way in the new testament, that then means we must do likewise? or do you see a distinction (which isn't always clear, i admit) between the things the apostles tell us to do and the things we are told the apostles did?
does that make sense?
Danny,
I understnd what you're saying about specifics. It's been difficult to write this without them. My hope was first to be able to establish a general principle by which to later address the specifics. I would probably do this a little differently if I were to do it again. I will get there eventually.
As far as the prescriptive/ descriptive distinction, at this point, I'm only arguing for the authority of the apostles' commands rather than their merely described practice. I think it would be much more difficult to argue for the binding authority of the descriptive passages. Although, as you point out, this raises some rather sticky issues.
First,what direct commands did Paul ever give to Covenant OPC or Greeneville Grace? None. All we really have in the scriptures is the description of Paul giving such commands to other churches.
Obviously, by implication many? most? of these commands apply to us, though some certainly do not. For example I don't feel especially compelled to bring Paul's cloak from Troas. The problem is that not all the differences between commands are so obvious. How to distinguish? I don't precisely know. that's why I'm interested in having this conversation.
On the other hand, even on matters where there is no formal command involved, I really have a difficult time understanding why, if we knew precisely what the apostles were doing, and barring any circumstances that were clearly peculiar to that age, we would just decide to scrap it and do something else. But this is probably more an issue of wisdom than of obedience to a command. I'll save it for a later discussion, perhaps.
Yes, there is a big difference between head coverings and church polity. But the difference is not that one is a command and one is not. Both are clearly commands, and both have strong indications of universal application.
Does my wife wear one? No. Why not? Uhh...I guess it's more comfortable to pretend like the various exegetical explanations are convincing. After all, who wants to stand out like that? (No disrespect whatsoever intended toward my German Baptist Brethren sisters).
Thanks very much for the comments! Hope my answers were adequate.
Matt,
Sounds like we have about the same perspective on the WCC and the regulative principle: very useful, but secondary.
It's not been easy for me to find that balance between making use of the wisdom of those who have gone before us and always wanting to re-evaluate everything afresh. I don't want to depend upon the traditions of men, but I don't want to always be reinventing the wheel either (depending upon my own "wisdom" and ability to interpret the scriptures). It's a tension. I still haven't resolved it for myself.
I appreciate the comment and the book recommendation. I'll check it out.
Post a Comment