I like what Will Rochow wrote this evening on being controversialRethinking Faith and Church: Controversial? Who, Me?. Many people confuse being divisive with being controversial. Many others see asking questions, tipping sacred cows, pointing out unsupported assumptions, recognizing hypocrisy, etc. as signs of being a "bad" Christian. A "good" Christian becomes a member of a local church and dutifully shows up on Sunday, puts money in the plate, pays attention and shakes the preachers hand after the "worship service" (but certainly don't ask him any questions because he knows Greek and is ordained).
Really? Following a Man who radically reordered the religious world, who sought out the lost and those on the margins of the society and refused to kowtow to the proper and genteel religious authorities, a Man who turned the world upside-down, is not a life of going along to get along. Paul was probably considered controversial when he called Peter out for his hypocrisy in not eating with gentiles so as not to offend his pals of the circumcision party. Somehow we have taken a counter-cultural, tradition shattering faith and turned it into a toothless, milquetoast faith of people who shuffle in and out of a building and think they are being "Christians".
I don't see that being a faithful follower of Christ means apathy and unquestioning obedience to human authorities. Of course it also doesn't mean being divisive or causing disunity but there certainly is a way to pull back the curtains on our rituals and traditions, perhaps even poking a stick in the hornets nest now and again, without being divisive. A unity built on error and apathy is not true unity anyway. So go ahead and be a little controversial. Do it in love of course but after all being loving often means going against the flow. What could be more fitting for a people who follow a Shepherd who conquered death by dying and defeated His foes by letting them crucify Him?
No comments:
Post a Comment