I appreciated what you wrote in your first post about areas of agreement with the Third way and agree with this post that adopting the Third Way approach will greatly impact how we do church. I write only to clarify what I think is the central issue in what the Third Way is proposing—a new priority.
I sense the “non-salvific” label of the Third Way is created to distinguish between the justification and sanctification aspects of salvation. As you argue both matter—a lot. I don’t sense the Third Way would disagree with you. What I sense they are asserting is our mission and people coming to know Christ (justification) is a greater priority. Thus as you state in your first blog they talk a lot about unity and mission. They state “we are committed to creating space for disagreement on non-salvific ethical issues in service to maintain the prioritization of the mission of the gospel and protect the unity of the church.” Church history shows most of our battles and divisions are over “non salvific” or sanctification issues. I sense in your first blog that you agree these battles often diminish our ability to live our mission well and often actually serve our enemy more than our Lord. You are right that making our unity and mission our new priority will effect how we do church. It will lessen the priority we have placed on our confessions but it will not do away with them.
Our recent struggle gives us another opportunity to examine our priorities and ask which one our Lord prioritizes. We all believe they both matter. The Third Way makes their priority clear and asks us all to consider which one we are choosing and why. I think it is a question worth asking.
Hey Eric, Thanks for your reply. As I read your response I sense we see things different in our church. I honestly wonder if the historic CRC has ever prioritized mission in comparison to getting our theological and ethical ducks in a row. When was the last time synod battled over making sure our churches are taking seriously Jesus' priority of making followers/disciples who are fishers of men? How many in our churches are discipled to share their testimony and disciple others? Today we make our missionaries raise their own support for the most part. My experience is that in our churches a lot of the battles are to avoid the cost of actually living Jesus mission to lost people. It seems to me many of these non salvific issue struggles enable us to do the same. So much time and energy spent on them. Don't hear me wrong, they matter. But as I read the gospels the mission Jesus was on always mattered more. Issues of the here and now are in some ways hospice issues. The gospel mission is about saving lives. So I agree we do well to wrestle with far reaching ramifications of the Third Way's proposal but for a very different reason. I agree "the ask" is greater than initially appears. Thanks for helping us ponder these important matters.
This is good conversation that helps me think through what we are addressing. Thanks.
I am blessed to hear that your church mission experience has been positive. And I agree that a conservative approach to ministry does not necessarily hinder mission and can be a real asset. Theological precision is a good thing and you are right Jesus calls for obedience. And I sense it is unifying in local churches that agree on what theological precision is.
The problem comes at the denominational level where theological precision has not been unifying but divisive. There is little personal relationship there and a variety of views and lines about what theological precision looks like. My sense is the Third Way is not diminishing the need for theological precision. It will not stop our wrestling with it. It will diminish the division we experience as a denomination over it. It will acknowledge that in our present culture we will not find final agreement in the church on these issues. So, for the sake of unity and mission focus and energy, they suggest we allow each church to live its convictions.
I agree that there is danger in this because, as you point out, what is thrown out next in individual churches. I also agree that if we could get every church to agree “to submit to the judgment and authority of the church that we have chosen to associate with” we could achieve the same end. But I just don’t see that actually happening in our present reality. What I do see is a world who needs Jesus watching his body the church castigating each over what in the end (eternity) doesn’t matter most and as a result the world dismisses what does matter most. That grieves me.
I admit the Third way is a denominational shift in polity but our present polity just isn’t serving us like it once did. I admit in the Third way shift we will lose some good things. But I believe we will also gain some good things. Maybe there is where our differences lie. In all honesty I am not completely sold on it. I welcome another "way" to achieve our common goal of unity that would serve our kingdom work better. Some think our more typical “Second Way” of just dividing is the answer. That seems like indulging one sin while battling another. I just want more people to find Jesus. We have to find some way to diminish the divisions and hostility in our church for we are becoming just like our culture. I sense that is a sin that is doing more damage to our mission than homosexual practice.
Thanks for listening and conversing. Have a blessed Good Friday as we remember what our Lord did for us and all those around us.
Posted in: Thinking About a 'Third Way' – Are Non-salvific Matters Negotiable?
I appreciated what you wrote in your first post about areas of agreement with the Third way and agree with this post that adopting the Third Way approach will greatly impact how we do church. I write only to clarify what I think is the central issue in what the Third Way is proposing—a new priority.
I sense the “non-salvific” label of the Third Way is created to distinguish between the justification and sanctification aspects of salvation. As you argue both matter—a lot. I don’t sense the Third Way would disagree with you. What I sense they are asserting is our mission and people coming to know Christ (justification) is a greater priority. Thus as you state in your first blog they talk a lot about unity and mission. They state “we are committed to creating space for disagreement on non-salvific ethical issues in service to maintain the prioritization of the mission of the gospel and protect the unity of the church.” Church history shows most of our battles and divisions are over “non salvific” or sanctification issues. I sense in your first blog that you agree these battles often diminish our ability to live our mission well and often actually serve our enemy more than our Lord. You are right that making our unity and mission our new priority will effect how we do church. It will lessen the priority we have placed on our confessions but it will not do away with them.
Our recent struggle gives us another opportunity to examine our priorities and ask which one our Lord prioritizes. We all believe they both matter. The Third Way makes their priority clear and asks us all to consider which one we are choosing and why. I think it is a question worth asking.
Posted in: Thinking About a 'Third Way' – Are Non-salvific Matters Negotiable?
Hey Eric, Thanks for your reply. As I read your response I sense we see things different in our church. I honestly wonder if the historic CRC has ever prioritized mission in comparison to getting our theological and ethical ducks in a row. When was the last time synod battled over making sure our churches are taking seriously Jesus' priority of making followers/disciples who are fishers of men? How many in our churches are discipled to share their testimony and disciple others? Today we make our missionaries raise their own support for the most part. My experience is that in our churches a lot of the battles are to avoid the cost of actually living Jesus mission to lost people. It seems to me many of these non salvific issue struggles enable us to do the same. So much time and energy spent on them. Don't hear me wrong, they matter. But as I read the gospels the mission Jesus was on always mattered more. Issues of the here and now are in some ways hospice issues. The gospel mission is about saving lives. So I agree we do well to wrestle with far reaching ramifications of the Third Way's proposal but for a very different reason. I agree "the ask" is greater than initially appears. Thanks for helping us ponder these important matters.
Posted in: Thinking About a 'Third Way' – Are Non-salvific Matters Negotiable?
This is good conversation that helps me think through what we are addressing. Thanks.
I am blessed to hear that your church mission experience has been positive. And I agree that a conservative approach to ministry does not necessarily hinder mission and can be a real asset. Theological precision is a good thing and you are right Jesus calls for obedience. And I sense it is unifying in local churches that agree on what theological precision is.
The problem comes at the denominational level where theological precision has not been unifying but divisive. There is little personal relationship there and a variety of views and lines about what theological precision looks like. My sense is the Third Way is not diminishing the need for theological precision. It will not stop our wrestling with it. It will diminish the division we experience as a denomination over it. It will acknowledge that in our present culture we will not find final agreement in the church on these issues. So, for the sake of unity and mission focus and energy, they suggest we allow each church to live its convictions.
I agree that there is danger in this because, as you point out, what is thrown out next in individual churches. I also agree that if we could get every church to agree “to submit to the judgment and authority of the church that we have chosen to associate with” we could achieve the same end. But I just don’t see that actually happening in our present reality. What I do see is a world who needs Jesus watching his body the church castigating each over what in the end (eternity) doesn’t matter most and as a result the world dismisses what does matter most. That grieves me.
I admit the Third way is a denominational shift in polity but our present polity just isn’t serving us like it once did. I admit in the Third way shift we will lose some good things. But I believe we will also gain some good things. Maybe there is where our differences lie. In all honesty I am not completely sold on it. I welcome another "way" to achieve our common goal of unity that would serve our kingdom work better. Some think our more typical “Second Way” of just dividing is the answer. That seems like indulging one sin while battling another. I just want more people to find Jesus. We have to find some way to diminish the divisions and hostility in our church for we are becoming just like our culture. I sense that is a sin that is doing more damage to our mission than homosexual practice.
Thanks for listening and conversing. Have a blessed Good Friday as we remember what our Lord did for us and all those around us.