Further thoughts on the matters I discussed last night.
The issue of religious cooperation between groups that differ theologically is a velcro-ish one. I have come to a view of my own, which I’ll outline here. Use it if you find it helpful. If not, no big deal.
Cooperation looks very different today than it did when I was young. In those easy times (easy from a social point of view), Christians had the luxury of being stand-offish with each other. A Lutheran church might very reasonably refuse to participate in, say, a community event where a Baptist preacher spoke (though my own people were pretty tolerant of Billy Graham). Even the Baptists understood that. In its way, it was a statement of respect for Baptist exceptionalism.
And cooperating with Catholics? Well, that would only happen in the face of something very big. A community tragedy, perhaps. And even then the Lutherans would take some steps to make it clear they weren’t giving tacit assent to the idea of the authority of the pope.
It’s different now. Christians who actually believe the historic faith are a small remnant, with our backs to the wall, fighting for survival. In general (there are exceptions), if somebody throws us an ammunition belt or shares his canteen, we don’t ask which division he comes from. We have much greater differences with those guys over there who are trying to kill us.
Still, there are limits. Politics is different from faith. I won’t pray with some people, though I’d vote for them. It would be untrue to my own creed, and condescending to theirs.
In my Bible study some years back, I came across what I judge to be Jesus Christ’s principle in these matters.
First of all, there’s Matthew 12:30, where Jesus says, “He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters.”
A hard statement, beloved of stern sectarians (like me, I suppose). This verse falls like a cleaver, chopping humanity into two segments.
But there’s another statement, similar but intriguingly different, in Mark 9:39-40: “Do not stop him,” Jesus said, “No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad against me, for whoever is not against us is for us.”
“What’s this?” I used to wonder. “Isn’t this a contradiction?”
Then I read closely, and realized it’s not a contradiction at all. Jesus is discussing two different things.
In Matthew, He says that whoever is not with Him is against Him.
In Mark, He says that whoever is not against us is for us.
The difference is in the pronouns.
I think Jesus is setting up a hierarchy of values here. The crucial thing is what someone confesses about Jesus. That’s an in or out matter; faith in Him is central and determinative.
But when it comes to being for or against “us” (our group within the Christian community), the standard is lower. I don’t have to demand that someone else share my group’s every point of theology in order to accept them as brethren.
I need to carefully examine what they say about Jesus—don’t get me wrong on that. But once I’m satisfied that they believe in the Christ of Scripture and the creeds, then I can agree to disagree on other stuff.
This is my own interpretation. I am willing to be corrected by wiser souls.
