Breaking Camp(s)

From his 2001 book GodViews: Convictions that Drive and Divide Us, Jack Haberer arrives into 2015 as a prophet.   The fourteen year old book is a call to attend to denominational differences that, today, are brimming over.  The book is relevant and powerful. On March 1st from 4-6 p.m. we will be reviewing the book as we prepare to discuss proposed amendment changes to our denomination’s constitution on Thursday March 5th at 7 p.m.  Our Presbytery, Grace, votes on those amendments on its Saturday meeting scheduled for March 7th.

In the beginning of his book, Haberer notes the dynamics, or lack there of, found in binary thinking.  Not unlike the dominant two party system of our national government, folks in America are prone to binary thinking.  It’s “us” or “them” on any number of matters.  This, Haberer notes, is true in our denominational culture as well. In fact, he remembers an action of the 2000 General Assembly, the national gathering of our denomination.  This action, initiated by Evangelical Christians within our denomination sought to declare an impasse.  The impasse was understood to have been created by contrasting theological and ethical beliefs between two camps within our denomination, “liberals” and “conservatives”.  The proposed resolution to the impasse was that “liberals” might leave the denomination. Ironically and sadly, today, we have witnessed a exodus of the church, not of “liberal voices” but of “conservative voices”.

The question is still clearly before us, “Is our denomination, PC(USA) at an impasse in terms of theology and ethics? How will a perceived impasse affect our local congregations?  Haberer encourages our questions but challenges the idea of impasse in the following ways:

1. The idea of an impasse declares “…that today’s church is much more divided than were churches in the apostolic era…” (24, GodViews).  When, in fact, the evidence is that divisions plagued the ancient church in places like Corinth.(1 Corinthians 1:13).
2. The thesis of the impasse was “that some believe that ‘the Bible is accurate and the Word of God speaks to entire Church with absolute authority.’ while others believe that ‘biblical authority is determined by personal feelings or various academic disciplines.'” (26)  Haberer notes that most all Christians have preferred selections of scripture and that most all Christians appreciate the academy’s informing influence upon our texts.
3. The impasse goes too far in characterizing camps of people.  One camp might be characterized by theological grounding in the Five Solae of the Protestant Reformation.  The other camp might be characterized by the ethics of love and justice as proclaimed by Jesus and the prophets.  Haberer asks us, if these two camps can be successfully excluded from one another and faithfully reflect the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
4. Finally, Haberer notes that two party thinking not only contributes to gross oversimplifications but it also paralyzes “the very communication that could help correct misrepresentations.” (26)

We gather on March 1st to more fully consider the way that Haberer suggests we understand one another in order to move beyond paralysis.  This will be a fun and interactive meeting with an purpose around our ultimate concerns.  Is our denomination forever lopsided toward one camp or the other?  Does our denomination leave no room for a multiplicity of voices to be heard with integrity?

Let’s break camp(s) and move into Haberer’s spacious and  gracious society of GodViews.  Bring a friend, you will be glad you did.