"We CAN Be Unified!"
"We CAN Be Unified!"
More on superficial unity
When the Reformation began in 1517, Luther faced an uphill battle against the papacy and its adherents. He fought theological battles concerning the authority of the Church, means of grace, and exegetical methodology. Luther maintained that he held a purely catholic and historic understanding of worship, sacraments, and broadly speaking, Christology. That is, he held to orthodox doctrines and theology, following in the biblical tradition of apostolic Christendom.
And while this theological battle originated against the Catholic Church, Luther faced opposition from other Reformation theologians whose tradition would later become known as the “Reformed” tradition. They challenged Luther on matters of the sacraments, worship, and many key doctrines in Christology.
This intra-Reformation disagreement led to a series of formal meetings between the Lutheran and Reformed theologians. One of these meetings, the Marburg Colloquy, was a monumental meeting that occurred between October 2 and 3, 1529. Martin Luther, accompanied by Philipp Melanchthon, Justus Jonas, and others, debated fifteen primary articles of faith with Reformed theologian Ulrich Zwingli and his allies.
The Marburg Colloquy ended abruptly due to a disease outbreak in the city of Marburg, which forced the two parties to produce a working document summarizing their discussions. This document, the Marburg Articles, displayed surprising unity between the Lutheran and Reformed theologians on every article except the last—concerning the true presence of Christ’s Body and Blood in the Eucharist.
The unresolved article remained so until 1973, when Lutheran and Reformed churches in Europe resolved the dispute through the Leuenberg Agreement. This agreement resolved the contentious article by focusing on what the sacrament does as opposed to what it actually is. Thus, these churches have forsaken the necessary doctrinal unity concerning what the Sacrament of the Altar is for the sake of superficial ecclesial unity–this is essentially to say, “We may not agree on the means, but we agree on the end!”
The Leuenberg Agreement laid the groundwork for the 1998 Full Communion Agreement between several Reformed church bodies in the United States and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). These church bodies no longer concern themselves with the necessity of holding to what the Sacrament is, and have opted to agree only on what it does (though even this is disputed in many Reformed and Lutheran circles).
This superficial unity commenced as a result and is indicative of a larger problem in American Christendom. Many church bodies now see theology as an antiquated discipline. Theologians have long divided the church over inconsequential doctrines, destroying the unity that the Church would otherwise enjoy–or so modern Christians may say.
It may be true that some theologians have needlessly disrupted the unity of the Church over meaningless disagreements and pestilent quarrels. Others have sown seeds of discord for the sake of inciting disagreement and disunity within the Church. Alas, the Church includes only sinners, all of whom desperately need God’s grace and the unity that His Spirit bestows.
It is also true that doctrinal and theological unity can only exist where this is doctrinal and theological agreement. This is not to say that disagreeing church bodies may not unify around basic doctrines like justification by grace through faith or the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, as well as societal or cultural issues like homosexuality, abortion, etc. Rather, churches cannot declare full communion with one another where doctrinal or theological agreement is not present–especially concerning articles of faith.
For example, the ELCA and LCMS cannot declare altar and pulpit fellowship because the two church bodies disagree on several key doctrines such as ordination, homosexuality, biblical inerrancy, and many other issues. It would be superficial, and in fact deceptive, for the ELCA and LCMS to declare agreement on ordination, for example, when the two in no way agree on the nature of ordination. For while one holds that women should be ordained, the other teaches that only men should be ordained. It would not be enough to agree on the end of the ministry – that is, the purpose for which God instituted it – and not the means or essence of the office – that is, the guidelines, qualifications, and purposes of the pastoral office.
The superficial unity to which the Full Communion Agreement of 1998 attests demonstrates the lack of concern for the revealed truths given by God in His Word. Many denominations have essentially “agreed to disagree” and nevertheless declared theological and doctrinal agreement, when in fact there is little agreement among them. But one must wonder why?
In American Lutheranism, the seeds of superficial unity were fully manifested in the Seminex debacle of the 1970s, when several members of the faculty of Concordia Seminary St. Louis taught that the Word of God is not inerrant and authoritative; for instance, there was a claim that the story of Jonah and the whale did not actually happen, but is rather a poetic allegory. Some theologians even went so far as to say the Incarnation and Resurrection did not occur, simply because they could not have rationally occurred.
Stated Clerk (or head) of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church Clifton Kirkpatrick remarked of the Full Communion Agreement upon its passage that it “culminates a 30-year search to together find a way to the glory of God to express the unity of Christ's church.” Likewise, Guy S. Edmiston Jr., bishop of the ELCA's Lower Susquehanna Synod exclaimed, "Out of our shared commitment to the gospel, we've come together after 450 years to say, 'There is nothing that should divide us. We can be in full communion. This is a united witness we make to the world.'"
I posit that bishop Edmiston is not entirely wrong. There is nothing that should divide us. Scripture is incontrovertibly clear concerning matters of faith. Concerning the Lord’s Supper, Scripture clearly teaches that the Lord’s true Body and true Blood are present under the bread and wine. Scripture is explicitly unambiguous that Baptism is salvific, and that God desires all, including and especially infants, to be baptized. Scripture is undeniably perspicuous that one must be a male to enter the holy ministry.
Division, however, persists. Various denominations propound that their logical and philosophical presuppositions are based in Scripture. In their minds, their theology is true. And yet, it seems that this superficial doctrinal unity abounds. The “united witness” to which the former ELCA bishop referred is one of discord, disunity, and dissimilarity–and strangely, all of its participants have grossly misread, misinterpreted, and mistaught the clear, foundational doctrines of Scripture that are the basis of faith and the essence of Christendom.
It is not coincidental that these churches have declared superficial doctrinal unity and have held to undeniably errant doctrines. They have blurred the lines between Scripture’s teachings and the doctrines of their churches and the required unity in doctrine and theology that must exist between churches in order to share full altar and pulpit communion.
Behind every motive for superficial unity is an appeal to the Gospel. “We must do this so that we can proclaim the Gospel!” Yet it is ironic that this appeal to the Gospel falls flat when disagreeing and doctrinally unsound churches profess doctrines contrary to that very Word which procured our salvation on the cross. They deny the essence of the Gospel, but claim that theological disagreement is useless and must be dispensed for the sake of the Gospel. Doctrinal disagreements are needless; we must agree to disagree because all that matters is the Gospel.
Instead, a proper confession of the Gospel, and the refusal to accept the illogical terms and conditions of doctrinally malnourished churches even for the sake of unity, are required. Scripture necessitates that we profess the name, person, and work of Christ rightly. We must cling to the true Gospel, which is found in the proper preaching of Law and Gospel, right administration of the Sacraments, and a clear biblical confession of our faith. This we must do, for there can be no other.