Local Church Discussions - View Single Post

Cal · 03-17-2015, 08:29 AM

HERn, I enjoyed and agreed with the eloquent quote your post. But my first thought was how LCMers would be instantly suspicious of such sentiments. They would be inclined to call it "shaking hands over the fence." The problem with that view is not that it is wrong to desire strong expressions of unity, but that it insists that unity must be expressed in a certain specific way, in the LCM case submitting to LCM elders and leaders "on the ground of locality."

But, as OBW suggested, the arrival at the unity of the faith is not something whose practical outworkings are clear to us. We can assume there will be love, harmony and cooperation, but we cannot say how that will look from leadership or gathering standpoints. It is the height of arrogance to expect all Christians to submit to a specific set of leaders or meet in specific places, no matter what you think of the benefits.

The LCM got locked into a view of oneness which in essence meant nothing more than bowing before arbitrary elders (always their's interestingly) while mouthing platitudes about "one church one city." As Ohio suggested, it has become clear that this is nothing more than a conveniently disguised scheme to (1) control members and (2) discredit non-conforming Christians and groups. In other words, exclusiveness.

03-17-2015, 08:29 AM	#231
Cal Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: USA Posts: 4,333	Re: How Much To Throw Out? HERn, I enjoyed and agreed with the eloquent quote your post. But my first thought was how LCMers would be instantly suspicious of such sentiments. They would be inclined to call it "shaking hands over the fence." The problem with that view is not that it is wrong to desire strong expressions of unity, but that it insists that unity must be expressed in a certain specific way, in the LCM case submitting to LCM elders and leaders "on the ground of locality." But, as OBW suggested, the arrival at the unity of the faith is not something whose practical outworkings are clear to us. We can assume there will be love, harmony and cooperation, but we cannot say how that will look from leadership or gathering standpoints. It is the height of arrogance to expect all Christians to submit to a specific set of leaders or meet in specific places, no matter what you think of the benefits. The LCM got locked into a view of oneness which in essence meant nothing more than bowing before arbitrary elders (always their's interestingly) while mouthing platitudes about "one church one city." As Ohio suggested, it has become clear that this is nothing more than a conveniently disguised scheme to (1) control members and (2) discredit non-conforming Christians and groups. In other words, exclusiveness.