And to my way of thinking, might not 'denominationalism' be part of the systemic (injustice) issue? After all, which denomination was formed in order to better serve the poor, the immigrant, the widow or orphan? (Hope someone comments to dissuade me from that notion.)
No. Denominations form as a group of people decide their way is yet better, and worth dividing over -- despite Christ's (and His apostles') tenets otherwise. The process of fracturing is a process of "me first" thinking -- not serving others.
And once biblical unity-amid-diversity is not taught and practiced in the body of Christ... "the horse is out the barn door" -- anything goes.
We need the ongoing call of scripture (and stimulation among one another) to love & serve one another, and most notably the poor, the immigrant, the widow & orphan.
"Those the world regards as poor... are rich in faith."
"And it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven."
Thanks for reading and engaging Neil. A couple thoughts:
Denominations are rooted in traditions. I don’t know of denominations that were founded to reach the poor, but I know that in many traditions, serving the poor can be traced back to their roots.
I think if we were to add up all the mega churches that have grown massive while neglecting the poor, I think more than half would be non-denominational.
Furthermore, I do not believe non-denominational churches are better for unity. In fact, I often think they’re worse. In non-denominational churches without outside accountability, pastors are free to become mini-popes. I think we both know how often, sadly, this is the case.
I don’t think denominations are the issue. Greed is. And greed can take root systematically in a denomination, or in a general evangelical culture obsessed with size and performance.
Every faithful Christian is a participant in some kind of system. General calls for the church to do more for the poor tend to be pretty meaningless. We’d be better off if we committed ourselves to reforming the systems of which we are currently a part. In my case, that’s Reformed Presbyterianism.
So much of that I agree with, Ben! It’d be hard to say re which is worse, denominations which have created whole vertical systems which neglect the vulnerable, vs. “independent” churches (which the very nature of the terminology is so counter-scriptural). And as you say, we may have to choose between working within one of those systems… or slowly but surely connecting the best elements within each of the citywide nodes. Thanks for your response, brother. Keep up the good work writing!
Well written, Ben.
And to my way of thinking, might not 'denominationalism' be part of the systemic (injustice) issue? After all, which denomination was formed in order to better serve the poor, the immigrant, the widow or orphan? (Hope someone comments to dissuade me from that notion.)
No. Denominations form as a group of people decide their way is yet better, and worth dividing over -- despite Christ's (and His apostles') tenets otherwise. The process of fracturing is a process of "me first" thinking -- not serving others.
And once biblical unity-amid-diversity is not taught and practiced in the body of Christ... "the horse is out the barn door" -- anything goes.
We need the ongoing call of scripture (and stimulation among one another) to love & serve one another, and most notably the poor, the immigrant, the widow & orphan.
"Those the world regards as poor... are rich in faith."
"And it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven."
Thanks for reading and engaging Neil. A couple thoughts:
Denominations are rooted in traditions. I don’t know of denominations that were founded to reach the poor, but I know that in many traditions, serving the poor can be traced back to their roots.
I think if we were to add up all the mega churches that have grown massive while neglecting the poor, I think more than half would be non-denominational.
Furthermore, I do not believe non-denominational churches are better for unity. In fact, I often think they’re worse. In non-denominational churches without outside accountability, pastors are free to become mini-popes. I think we both know how often, sadly, this is the case.
I don’t think denominations are the issue. Greed is. And greed can take root systematically in a denomination, or in a general evangelical culture obsessed with size and performance.
Every faithful Christian is a participant in some kind of system. General calls for the church to do more for the poor tend to be pretty meaningless. We’d be better off if we committed ourselves to reforming the systems of which we are currently a part. In my case, that’s Reformed Presbyterianism.
So much of that I agree with, Ben! It’d be hard to say re which is worse, denominations which have created whole vertical systems which neglect the vulnerable, vs. “independent” churches (which the very nature of the terminology is so counter-scriptural). And as you say, we may have to choose between working within one of those systems… or slowly but surely connecting the best elements within each of the citywide nodes. Thanks for your response, brother. Keep up the good work writing!
I remember reading this quote somewhere (wink):
The liberation theologian Gustavo Gutierrez once asked, “You say you care about the poor? Then tell me, what are their names?”
That might be a good question for a church, not just an individual.
Thank you for helping establish the Ben’s Theology of Poverty Substack Universe (BTPSU)
Glad to help, but that acronym needs work.
Ben's Overlooked and Oppressed Theology Substack.
Putting BOOTS on the ground!
Niiiiice