Denominational Ice Cream

Over the years I have heard that the different Christian denominations are basically all the same. Yes, there are differences - one may use a little water to baptize while another uses a lake or one uses real wine another uses juice. One has smells and bells while another has a band - but in the end they are fundamentally the same.

Some time ago I introduced myself to someone and they had this mindset that all denominations are basically the same. This person asked me, “so what is your denominational flavor?” It was at that moment that a metaphor came to me to describe denominations. And while metaphors are not perfect, I offer up this metaphor to highlight what I mean.

Some of us might think that denominations are like ice cream. They are all made of milk, sugar and some various ingredients. You may have vanilla or you may have rocky road, but no one confuses ice cream (regardless of the flavor) as anything but ice cream. And so, in this way it makes sense that someone may ask what is your denominational “flavor”.

However, and sticking with the sweet theme here, denominations are all similar in that they are dessert but they are not all ice cream. Some are cake. Some are pie. Some are ice cream. Some are cheese trays.

I think one of the greatest dessert is tres leches cake. For the deprived souls who have not embarked on the journey of delight that is tres leches cake, image a very light cake soaked in a sweet milk and topped with fresh berries, whipped cream and cinnamon. It is amazing. If I were to seek out and order tres leches and the server brings me ice cream, I would know the difference. There are obvious differences in those two items - even as they are both dessert items. I would not say, “well all dessert are basically all the same.”

And here is the rub, some of us feel like the only way that we can speak about our dessert is to shame or tear down the other desserts. Some Christians feel like the only way to assert the beauty of their denomination is to talk about the ugliness of other denominations. And so there are misrepresentations and misinformation. Fear and hate are spat out for the sake of getting others to, if not join a preferred denomination, at least reject another.

Some of us are lactose intolerant and need to avoid ice cream. Some of us have a gluten allergy and need to avoid cake. Some of us are diabetic and need to consider sugar free options. We understand this with desserts and yet we sometimes overlook this practice in our search for a community of faith all because it is assumed that “all denominations are basically the same.”

They are not and that is a feature not a bug . It is important to find the denomination that nourishes your body, mind, spirit and soul.

Otherwise we may end up becoming very sick.

Disgust Will Kill the UMC and GMC

Within the United Methodist Church, the conventional wisdom is that differences divide and similarities unite. Therefore we need to create churches of like-mindedness because a church that has differences cannot walk together. It is the conventional wisdom that differences are obstacles to relationships, and so those obstacles must be removed or we must end the relationship. It is naïve to suggest otherwise. It is seen as ridiculous to suggest the opposite - that differences are what unite and our similarities are what divide.

And yet, I read this parable in Luke 18:9-14 in the Common English Bible:

9 Jesus told this parable to certain people who had convinced themselves that they were righteous and who looked on everyone else with disgust: 10 “Two people went up to the temple to pray. One was a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood and prayed about himself with these words, ‘God, I thank you that I’m not like everyone else—crooks, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week. I give a tenth of everything I receive.’ 13 But the tax collector stood at a distance. He wouldn’t even lift his eyes to look toward heaven. Rather, he struck his chest and said, ‘God, show mercy to me, a sinner.’ 14 I tell you, this person went down to his home justified rather than the Pharisee. All who lift themselves up will be brought low, and those who make themselves low will be lifted up.”

The Pharisee and the tax collector are both in the temple praying, but they are separated. Why are they separated? Because the Pharisee is disgusted with the tax-collector who is a heretical, stealing Jew who, from the perspective of the Pharisee, does not have a high view of scripture. Because if the tax collector did have a high view of scripture, they would know that it is a clear violation of scriptural to work for the Romans who worship other gods and enslave people. Disgust is an expulsive response humans have when we encounter disgusting things. It is why we push a plate away when we taste something bad. The Pharisee chose, for the sake of Orthodoxy, to separate himself from the dirty, lying, unclean tax collector.

Then notice, that when the two finish their payers, the parable reads, “I tell you, this person went down to his home justified rather than the Pharisee.” The word in this parable translated as, “rather than” in Greek is the word, “par”. Par means “alongside”, as in “parallel” parking. At the end of the parable, the two men left the temple side by side.

Something happened in their prayer that removed disgust and the two walked alongside one another. They each were converted from their own disgust. The Pharisee no longer is disgusted by the tax collector and the tax collector is no longer disgusted with himself. The Pharisee is brought low, as in brought down to the proper level since he thought to greatly of himself. And the tax collector was lifted up, as in brought up to the proper level since he though too little of himself. And they walked out alongside one another.

We have no proof that either man changed how they prayed or how they lived. We may assume that the each went back to their work and their lives. We may assume they each went back to interpreting the scriptures the way the had before the prayer session. We may assume they have many differences even to this day, but they walk alongside one another.

The Pharisee and the tax collector understand that it is their differences that bring them together. It is their differences - not their sameness - that attracts one to the other. They understand that they could walk along side each other, even with their fundamental disagreements. The only thing keeping them apart was disgust.

The UMC is splintering, breaking, tearing or whatever word you want to use. The argument is that we have fundamental differences about the authority of scripture, the sovereignty of God, the role of the church, the human condition and the nature of sin. For the sake of argument, lets assume that the UMC and the WCA really do have such fundamental differences (we don’t, regardless of leadership suggesting otherwise). Are we to accept that the differences between the UMC and the GMC are so vast and so much greater than that of the Pharisee and a tax collector? If you think so then I would encourage a re-read of the Gospels.

After prayer, the Pharisee and the tax collector can walk alongside the other, not because one convinced the other, but because in prayer we let go of disgust.

Ultimately, from where I sit, the reason for the turmoil in the UMC is not because of any of the stated reasons, but it is because of disgust. We are disgusted with each other. You see this disgust in all the digital ink spilled as the GMC makes a claim about the UMC and then the UMC makes a claim about the GMC. We grow more and more disgusted with one another and, disgust is an expulsive action.

The GMC is pushing the UMC plate away. The UMC is pushing the GMC plate away. Neither of us will be justified when we come down our little mountains of self-righteousness.

If you read this parable and think, “The tax collector is doing it right and shame on the Pharisee for doing it wrong” then we are doing the very same thing that the Pharisee is doing in the parable. Could this parable be, at least in part, a call to see that it is only when we walk alongside those who are different from us that we have the chance to convert from our disgust. If we do not overcome or even befriend our disgust then we will always be enslaved to it. The more we break into the “likeminded” communities the more disgusted we will be with others. And the most disgust we experience the more we will expel.

At which point it is only a matter of time before we expel Christ from our churches.

"Paint the Beauty We Split"

Some may argue that the fracturing, splintering and breaking up of the church is as old as civilization and therefore is some sort of proof that those who uphold unity as misguided at best. It is not lost on me that the current United Methodist Church is a break away from the Church of England which itself is a break away from the Catholic Church which was a split with the Eastern Church which split from the Jerusalem Council. I understand the human tradition of splitting. But it is also true the United Methodist Church is also a church that was birth at the union of at least two churches (the Methodist Church and the Evangelical United Brethren). Additionally, Jesus prayed in John that those who follow him might be made one. So for as many examples we can point to that splitting is God’s desire, there are just as many examples we can point to which suggests that unity is God’s desire.

This argument is boring and tiresome, but more, it distracts. It distracts from the larger human tradition captured in the following lines from In all Carlo Carretto’s book, The God Who Comes.

How baffling you are, oh Church, and yet how I love you! How you have made me suffer, and yet how much I owe you! I would like to see you destroyed, and yet I need your presence. You have given me so much scandal and yet you have made me understand what sanctity is. I have seen nothing in the world more devoted to obscurity, more compromised, more false, and yet I have touched nothing more pure, more generous, more beautiful. How often I have wanted to shut the doors of my soul in your face, and how often I have prayed to die in the safety of your arms. No, I cannot free myself from you, because I am you, though not completely. And besides, where would I go? Would I establish another? I would not be able to establish it without the same faults, for they are the same faults I carry in me. And if I did establish another, it would be my Church, not the Church of Christ. I am old enough to know that I am no better than anyone else.

The current splintering of the United Methodist Church is an example of the Church failing to understand our tendency to make Church reflect us and not Christ. We hear this in the way the Church is talking about if some should leave or stay. We hear that we should follow our convictions and that we ought to be able to let those who believe differently a gracious exit. The underlying assumption is that the personal conviction and beliefs are paramount, that those are what should drive what denomination a local church should be. Some will try to argue that it is less about personal conviction and more about adhering to some Biblical or creedal standard. But when the Bible and creeds never are in conflict with your convictions and beliefs it begs the question if we are just making “my Church” and not the “Church of Christ”. It is weird, is it not, that God always seems to have the same beliefs and convictions you have?

The truth is that I need the very people that I disagree with to walk with me. And the truth is, those who disagree with me need me in their lives too. I do not have all the answers and if you think that you do, then heck, I want you in my life! And if you have all the answers, then don’t you want to help those who, like me, do not have the answers?

To put this another way, I need you to show me how odd I am so that I can come to see that I am, as Carretto said, “am no better than anyone else”. When those who took the same vows that I took, decide to disaffiliate, then I believe all of our discipleship creates the conditions for all of us to become less faithful.

There is a song on the “Rise and Fall of Mars Hill” podcast called “Sticks and Stones”. Recently the producers talked with the lead singer of the song and asked about the lyric that says, “Paint the beauty we split.” The songwriter said that his take on this lyric is that it is a plea and prayer to God. That God may make beautiful (paint) the church (the beauty) that we are tearing apart (we split).

Lord in your mercy, hear this prayer.

What is a Denomination and a Nondenomination?

Do you ever wonder why some churches are called a denomination and others are called non-denomination?

Generally we associate denominations as part of the “mainline” which includes a wide range of protestant churches. I rarely hear anyone describe the Catholic Church a denomination. Usually, we drill down what our Christian faith tradition is in this sequence : Catholic or Protestant? If Protestant which denomination or non-denomination?

So what makes a denomination a denomination? Lets start with what a nomination is.

The word nomination come from the Latin word nominationem meaning "a naming, designation”. When we nominate something we name it or mention someone or something by name. It naming by what it is.

And so to “de-nominate” is to name by what it is not. A denomination in the Christian tradition is less defined by what it is than by what it is not. For instance, United Methodists are a denomination from the Church of England. The Church of England identifies seven sacraments. As a denomination of the Church of England, the United Methodists do not have seven sacrament, but there are two. What makes a denomination a denomination is not what it says, but what it does not say - what it denominates.

Another example is the denomination in the wings from the United Methodist Church - the Global Methodist Church (GMC). The current document that outlines this denomination is called Transitional Book of Doctrines and Discipline. If you are a United Methodist then you may feel like this document sounds like the current UMC’s guiding book called The Book of Discipline. Much of the Transitional Book and the Book of Discipline are so similar it is sometimes difficult to see how they are different. Again, a denomination is not marked by what it says, but what it does not say. One of the things the Transitional Book of the GMC does not say is what the Book of Discipline calls “Our Theological Task.” The ramifications of this is notable. The UMC affirms so deeply that doctrine and theology must go hand in hand to discern what God is doing in the world today. The GMC suggests that there is no new doctrine to be discovered and that every question already has an answer. To make the point even clearer, the only “restrictive rule” of the GMC reads:

In continuity with our Wesleyan heritage, the governing body of the Global Methodist Church shall not revoke, alter, or change our Articles of Religion or Confession of Faith, or establish any new standards of rules of doctrine contrary to our present existing and established standards of doctrine.

The GMC suggests that all that God has for humanity has already been stated and that theology is in service to doctrine - not a mutual partner. The UMC understands that there are questions that the world is asking that doctrine alone cannot address and doctrine must be in conversation with theology to discern God’s will. And so as a denomination, the GMC does not speak of the denomination’s theological task because doctrine is all that is essential. In this simple way, the GMC is denominating (not speaking) about theology, but is speaking about doctrine.

If a nomination is naming by what is, and a denomination is naming by what it is not, then what do we make of a “nondenomination”? (Que mind explosion.)

A non-denomination lacks a naming by what it is not. Or to put it another way, a nondenomination is doing everything it can to try to name everything. There ideal non-denomination is a place that has an answer for every question, problem, and vexation. That answer may be a bible verse or a statement of faith or a prayer, but the non-denomination works hard to teach that there is no lack, that there is an answer and that answer is found in the named sources of the nondenomination.

And so to recap:

• A nomination is a process of naming something by what it is.

• A denomination is a process of naming something by what it is not.

• A nondenominational rejects the idea of denominating and looks more like a nomination process.

And why does any of this matter? It matters to those of us who believe that doubt, unknowing and lack are not things that can be explained away but realities we must live with. This is the nature and role of theology. Through the art and practice of theology the disciple does not try to eliminate the felt sense of lack in their life, but come to see the lack as a friend. A friend who can teach us. Show me an organization that promises to make you whole and completely without lacking and I will show you an organization that is controlled by fear. Any nondenomination (or denomination for that matter) that suggests that all the questions to life are already solved is a Church that is ill equipped for the complexities of the world we are living in.