As compared to my most recent posts, this one is quite serious. The following thoughts are in regard to Keith Drury's "Legalism Scale," and the various responses to it. It can be found at this address
http://www.drurywriting.com/keith/recent.pretty.good.writing.htm, under the heading "I dare you to take this Test: Legalism Scale." Be sure to read the "Responses." Bascially, the conversation comes down to this: does a commitment to holiness make one a legalist? Let me make clear that I am not interested in any discussion on whether or not certain denominations are legalistic or have been in the past, but should a church that promotes holiness deal with personal conduct (for my Wesleyan tradition compadres)? Can a church, or should a church, address issues such as homosexual and adulterous relationships, pornographic material usage, divorce, materialism, etc. among its members? To summarize the responses to Dr. Drury's 'Scale,' quite a few people said "no," personal conduct issues are simply between the individual and God. Thus many of the respondents reported a 'level-zero' on the scale: "We just love people - it isn't about rules it's about relationship." Now for my humble thoughts, and I must say up front that I probably rank somewhere between level one and level two on the Scale.
First, I agree with Dr. Drury that a church has an obligation to set certain standards of conduct for its members, based upon biblical foundations and presupposing conversion. I have yet to see any biblical argument against this and Saint Paul seems to argue strongly for it. Related to this, a church has an obligation to take stands on conduct that are not explicitly mentioned in Scripture as well. Dr. Drury's example of slavery works well, and we could include abortion, cloning, use of illegal drugs, etc. In my opinion, it is not legalism by asking people to refrain from particular behaviors, whether explictly or implicity biblical, but I am certainly open to your thoughts and corrections on the matter. Obviously certain issues exist that are not matters of salvation, but still concern some denominations (e.g. alcohol and tobacco). I also think a denomination can address non-salvific issues as well and still refrain from legalism.
Secondly, my theology has been shaped, to a great extent, by the writings of John Howard Yoder and particularly Stanley Hauerwas. I find that Mennonite theology (although Hauerwas is Methodist, but was under the tutelage of Yoder) challenges me spiritually in a way most Protestant theology does not. I think the Mennonites have a better grasp on the church, community, and culture, than do Protestants, generally. What certain segments of the 'emerging church' are talking about now, the Mennonites (or at least Yoder) had figured out sixty years ago. By the way, I am not emerging, but do find some of their stances valid. So, where is this second point going? It is going to the point Hauerwas and Yoder make (primarily in
The Peaceable Kingdom and
The Politics of Jesus), that being a Christian cannot be separated from the being the Church and that the Church, by definition, is public and counter-cultural. The Church itself is a "social ethic," a "servant community," and all Christians are called, unconditionally, to follow the teachings of Christ as a public witness (yes, even in the commitment to nonviolence). Hence the only way the Christian life can be lived out is through community (no 'what if a person was trapped on a desert island' stuff); the Christian life and Scripture is more complex than simply 'relationship,' as is currently popular. Any person (i.e. Jesus Christ) that is not concerned with what I do (as opposed to simply 'heart matters') is not worth following. The quip, "a right heart leads to right action" is partially correct, but it grossly underestimates the sinfulness of humanity. Personally, I don't trust myself enough to leave my religious convictions or Jesus' teachings to my conscience. My conscience deludes me far too often; I need the Church. So, my answer is no, a commitment to holiness does not make one a legalist. It is this very commitment to Christ and the Church that define us. Hopefully this will start some conversation. Let the tomatoes fly! Yee-haw!
