Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

Plurality, in that it detracts from the unity that Jesus prayed for
(above all other things in His disciples), is to be avoided.

Plurality, in that it allows each of us to bring our own unique
gifts to each other and God is to be encouraged.

Which plurality were you talking about.  :-)

Note 375.1

>Plurality, in that it detracts from the unity that Jesus prayed for
>(above all other things in His disciples), is to be avoided.

Does plurality of religious belief necessarily equal disunity?

I think not.

Peace,
Richard

  >Does plurality of religious belief necessarily equal disunity?

  >I think not.

Hmmm.  I suspect that it doesn't exactly equal unity.  But it doesn't
necessarily equal disunity either.

What does it mean to be united?  United in action?  United in belief?
Presumably, action should be based on and preceeded by belief.  It
is possible (but rare, I think) to be truly united in action and
divided in belief.  When it does happen, it is only temporary for
as soon as the reason for uniting disappears, the unity is lost and
the dissension starts.

How would you say that plurality of belief will accomplish unity?

Collis

Note 375.3

>What does it mean to be united?  United in action?  United in belief?

United (to me) means connected, committed, in solidarity with, in intimate
relationship with, in essential agreement.  I suspect all churches experience
pluralism in belief in some measure.  It's really a matter of to what degree
and how much liberty is permitted in acknowledging the plurality.

Some churches - United Methodist and Disciples of Christ come to mind - make
lots of room for personal theology.  Some churches - Unitarian Universalist,
for example - celebrate the richness of their plurality.

>How would you say that plurality of belief will accomplish unity?

"Hardlining," the oppressive insistence on uniformity of belief, has done more
to drive people away from God and away from the church than any other single
factor, I suspect.  I know hardlining has driven more people away from this
notesfile than has embracing plurality.  If hardlining is a legitimate
practice for insuring unity, then who wants unity?

I personally doubt that an enforced unity is what Jesus prayed for, any more
than Pax Romana was Jesus' vision of shalom.

I doubt that plurality in itself will accomplish unity.  At the same time,
I shudder at the thought of unity achieved without any room for plurality.

Peace,
Richard

    Ultimately pluralism is a sign of estrangement from Christ. If we are
    in union with Him we will be united with each other. This doesn't mean
    we will all behave the same or even emphasize the same doctrines.
     	For example, John the Baptist came, as Jesus said, not eating
    bread(practically a religious duty for a Jew) where as Jesus came
    eating and drinking with the people. Jesus' explanation was that wisdom
    is justified of her children. In the context of pluralism, this means
    to me that different groups will be better suited to reach certain
    people than others. This doesn't necessarily make one better than
    another. In fact a group that is most doctrinally correct may be so
    singularly strange as to be unable to reach many people with the
    gospel.
    
    johN 

Note 375.5

>    In fact a group that is most doctrinally correct may be so
>    singularly strange as to be unable to reach many people with the
>    gospel.

This sentence brought to mind the Amish, the Shakers, even the Mormons.
I realize this is probably not what you intended by the singularly strange
group reaching out with the gospel.

Peace,
Richard

    re  .6
    
    Groups such as you mentioned are often better known for their oddities
    and heresies than their correct views. Yet they accept certain Bible
    truths that most Christians are indifferent to.
     I was thinking more of groups such as the Mennonites or Seventhday
     Adventists who fairly strong stands against alcohol and tobacco use,
     worldly entertainment and personal display such as jewelry. 
    
    johN

This is just a nit, but Seventh Day Adventists do not have a tenent of 
faith about alcohol, tobacco, or diet. Many avoid substances containing 
drugs and have a near-vegitarian diets for reasons of health. Statistically 
they tend to live longer. Their temperance may attribute to their longevity, 
but I have a hunch their strict observance of a day of rest has more to do 
with longer life than temperance.
Best wishes,
Rollyn

    I really like the statement about UU's that Richard made in 375.4
    
    "Some churches such as Unitarian Universalists celebrate the richness of
    their plurality."  
    
    That is a very accurate statement of how I view plurality and how my
    church, The UU church of Andover views plurality.  Thanks Richard, that
    is a great way of stating it.
    
    Pat

Note 375.7
    
>    Groups such as you mentioned are often better known for their oddities
>    and heresies than their correct views. Yet they accept certain Bible
>    truths that most Christians are indifferent to.

Perhaps most Christians are indifferent to the wrong set of Bible truths.
The majority is not always right.

>     I was thinking more of groups such as the Mennonites or Seventhday
>     Adventists who fairly strong stands against alcohol and tobacco use,
>     worldly entertainment and personal display such as jewelry.

The Amish actually splintered from the Mennonites.  Modern Mennonites are
visually indistinguishable from anyone else.  Because of our mutual concern
for the Christian expression of peace and social justice, I have many friends
who are Mennonite.

Peace,
Richard