A Sunday School class I attend is discussing Philip Gulley's book If the Church were Christian. Gulley is a Quaker pastor. He makes the following points: if the Church were Christian: (1) Jesus would be a model for living rather than an object of worship; (2) affirming our potential would be more important than condemning our brokenness; (3) reconciliation would be valued over judgment; (4) gracious behavior would be more important than right belief; (5) inviting questions would be valued more than supplying answers; (6) encouraging personal experience would be more important than communal uniformity; (7) meeting needs would be more important than maintaining institutions; (8) peace would be more important than power; (9) it would care more about love and less about sex; (10) this life would be more important than the afterlife. Comments?
If he would be a model for living then he would at least need to be admired, if not worshipped. Having a model entails an ideal, which is acknowledging a gap between what you are and what you should be. I think if living like Jesus were possible - not just in our actions but in our feelings and thoughts - the gap should, in theory, disappear. Devout Christians would throw away their models once they had been successful in living in accordance with them. This suggests to me that Christians don't want that and there are other motives for their spirituality.
Let the mind be in you that is in christ. You may adopt a perspective, share a thought without venerating the individual who introduced you to the thought. Not everyone who says to me lord lord will enter the kingdom of heaven, but those who keep my sayings. I think this follows with the title of the book, if the church were christian. Many people are in churches for reasons that have not a lot to do with "spirituality" and far more to do with social politic.
Then saying Jesus is your model is meaningless, because I can share a thought with anyone including my enemies. That's why I used the word "christian", to refer to the lot of them. It must be convenient for Gulley to have an institution upon which to place the criticisms against what would otherwise be seen as 'his kind'.
It could stand clarification. To be fair, institutions are not people although people become institutionalized. Whereas I consider what was pointed out to be good pointers, I do not regard them as destination. The "church" as originally conceived was an organization for the care and feeding of the community, not for the ritual observance of deity. When you pray, it is suggested, do it in secret.
I'm not really interested in the "Church". So I'm just commenting on what I believe to be "Christian". (1) Jesus would be a model for living rather than an object of worship; I do not believe Jesus to be God and thus he should not be worshiped. Since Christians are to be footstep followers of Jesus, to me that means that Jesus is our model for living. (2) affirming our potential would be more important than condemning our brokenness; Christians should acknowledge that they are broken but that is so they can move to fix what is broken not to condemn it. (3) reconciliation would be valued over judgment; It is not the "job" of Christians to judge others. It is our "job" to find our way back to God (reconciliation?) and help others to do so if possible. (4) gracious behavior would be more important than right belief; This one is a little more difficult, because it is a bit of a gray area. Much lately has been written about "tough love" and so the question comes up should one be "gracious" and stand by watching, agree with or even help someone who is self destructive (wrong beliefs). (5) inviting questions would be valued more than supplying answers; To me it would seem both are valuable and so one should not be valued over the other. (6) encouraging personal experience would be more important than communal uniformity; Well, I feel all our dealings with God are personal and a personal experience but yet God deals with mankind as a whole and thus some communal uniformity comes with the territory. (7) meeting needs would be more important than maintaining institutions; Isn't meeting needs what Christianity is all about? I can't recall Jesus ever talking about maintaining institutions. (8) peace would be more important than power; Since God is abundant in dynamic energy and he is pretty important I assume you are here talking about whether mankind should be seeking peace or power for themselves and we are told to be peacemakers, not power seekers. (9) it would care more about love and less about sex; Since sex is a gift from God there is nothing wrong with it, if properly used but sex and love are not the same thing, as many believe they are. So love is more important than sex. (10) this life would be more important than the afterlife. I believe that mankind was meant to live forever on earth and so there is no "afterlife", this life is life and so there is no life more important than this life.
