Unity, Liberty & Charity: Worshipping Together in a Blended Church (Part 2)

Last week, we began a short series on “unity, liberty, and charity,” looking at what brings us together as worshippers in blended, nondenominational churches—and also what can set us apart.

The first part focused on the essentials of the faith, which is where we are unified under a common confession of the gospel.

Now, let’s turn our attention to the differences that distinguish us, seeing where we either can or cannot have the liberty to hold certain points of view (and practices).

Secondary Issues

In theology, these differences are often called secondary issues. As opposed to primary tenets of the faith, secondary issues take a lower priority, but are nonetheless important to consider as we strive together to best understand God, how He has revealed Himself to us, and how we are to worship Him.

(It should be noted that the following discussion will be primarily focused on secondary issues within Christian Protestantism, as it is this institution that has greatest number of factions in faith and practice.)

For some churches, these secondary issues are dealbreakers for membership, leadership, and service. For others, they might be more relaxed while generally taking a particular position on a given issue. Here is a list of what you’ll most likely encounter, and some of which you probably weren’t even aware. (It’s not exhaustive, but focuses on common issues that arise.)

• Means of Salvation: I know, I know—this is a particularly divisive issue that makes its way into “essentials” for some church groups. The basic tension is centered around the question, “Did God choose some to be saved, keeping them and leaving others to damnation, or does man accept or reject the gift salvation of his own will, at any time?” The answers vary, whether you believe God has predestined a fixed number of saved persons, or if salvation is available to all to make a choice from their free will, and if you must cooperate to keep your salvation or if you are kept eternally secure. There’s a lot of Scriptural evidence to support these varying views, but depending on your approach, you can end up in any one of these camps; it’s up to you on where you land, based on your study of Scripture, the charitable wisdom of those who have also studied, and overall, discernment given by the Holy Spirit. What unites us, though, is a common confession that we are saved by grace through faith alone, not by works (Eph. 2:8–9).

• Baptism: In technical terms, this debate revolves around who gets baptized and the method of baptism. The mode involves two views: 1) paedobaptism (baptism of children of believers prior to their own profession of faith), usually applied in the method of aspersion (water is sprinkled over the recipient’s head) or affusion (pouring water instead of sprinkling); and 2) credobaptism (baptism of believers once they have made a profession of faith), applied through partial or full immersion. Again, there are verses in Scripture that support both paedo- and credobaptism (along with their respective methods), based on context and interpretation. In practice, compatibility between the camps depends on how you are involved in the church. For paedobaptists who are under the authority of a local church that only practices credobaptism, I believe there is room for waiting until your child makes a profession of faith before receiving that particular sacrament. (Others may not agree with me.) For the other way around, I’ve not seen any credobaptists compelled to baptize their children in a paedobaptist church, but oftentimes, those particular churches DO make confession of paedobaptism a requirement for membership. What unites us is a common commitment to come under the care of Christ’s visible church, with the sign of baptism being administered to represent a part of faith, however that might varyingly mean to individuals.

• The Presence of God in Communion: Many nondenominational churches practice a “memorial” view of the Lord’s supper. But various others hold to some other points of view. First is the literal Christ being held in the elements of communion, which is primarily a Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox view that most Protestants reject. Second is a view that holds Christ to be truly, physically present in the communion elements, even though the bread remains bread and the wine remains wine. (This can be found in Lutheranism.) For others, the communion elements are a sign and seal in which Christ’s spiritual presence is active, nourishing the believer’s soul and strengthening their faith. What unites us is a solemn, yet joyous act of obedience to the command of our Savior, calling us to drink and eat in remembrance of Him.

• Normative vs. Regulative Worship: This governs how we are to worship, focusing on what is or is not allowed. For adherents to the normative principle of worship, anything that is not forbidden in Scripture is allowable for worship. For those who agree to the regulative principle of worship, we can only worship in a way that is expressly commanded by God. In practice, super-obvious examples can look like exclusive psalmody (regulative), or “dance teams” (normative), but things like worship bands/modern styles are debated. In my home church, we would fall under a normative view, but we practice restraint when it comes to areas where human expression can overtake our sense of spiritual self-control. What unites us is another act of obedience to “not forsake the gathering of believers,” coming together to encourage one another as Christ’s return approaches (Hebrews 10:24–25).

• Eschatology: This is a fancy, theological term that simply looks at the “end times,” or Christ’s return in context with the Millennium (1000-year reign). The three primary camps are premillennialism (Christ will return before establishing His 1000-year reign), amillennialism (we are in the Millennium now, which is a symbolic period called the “church age,” not a literal 1000 years, after which Christ returns as final judge), and postmillennialism (Christ returns after a 1000-year period of blessedness for the church/world). What unites us is the literal return of Christ, fulfilling the promise of final judgment and full restoration of creation, along with eternal joy in perfect communion (physically, for all time) with Him and His church.

• Spiritual Gifts: You might fall into one of two camps here, either as a continuationist (all gifts are currently operant in the lives of believers), or a cessationist (some gifts, particularly those of the Apostles’ like healing, prophecy, and tongues/languages, have ceased, as they were used to prove the power of the gospel in establishing the church after Christ’s ascension). These two camps have often “gone to war” over the continuation vs. ceasing of particular gifts, leading to accusations of abuse (“fake” acts of spiritual gifts to gain notoriety, power, and wealth), or of near-total apathy to the power of the Holy Spirit. But what unites us is receiving first the gift of faith, spurring us on to exhort, teach, and encourage other believers AND share the gospel to an unbelieving world.

Liberty in the Differences

Whereas the essentials unite believers in blended churches, it’s the differences that bring the most friction and division. But this can be mitigated with the right approach; otherwise, you’re apt to stoke smolders of dissension instead of fanning the flames of unity and building up one another in love. This is the part of “liberty” that demands a certain range of tolerance, but not at the expense of orthodoxy and truth—which ultimately leads to charity for those of whom you disagree.

Here’s the thing: You can’t solve the problem of friction created by differences by avoiding conflict or disagreements. You need to engage each other thoughtfully, which goes beyond mere politeness.

And THAT is a post for another week, where we’ll talk about being charitable in our differences, circling back to what unifies us in the faith.

Be blessed 👊✌️