----------
Gail Reid wrote,

Is there a way here to deal with this under "mercy" rather than "judgment"? Can we find a strong piece of ground to stand on that is positive? Can we use the present public statements of our moderator etc regarding the acceptance of diversity and claim this regarding all displays?
----------

Gail (and others following this thread),

I write the following with concern. I like much of what Gail (and others) have written. I think there is a place to "fill the holes", to be light and salt to the world. I do think that we should use the "present public statements of our moderator regarding the acceptance of diversity" for areas like displays and such. After all it is only right that a person who holds to diversity in all areas should accept that diversity everywhere. However, I would caution that we don't hold to this view of diversity ourselves. Thus for myself, whereas I believe those who uphold diversity should live by it I do not uphold this form of diversity and thereby do not live by it.

Let me explain this from what Gail wrote and where my concerns come in,
----------
This was very effective in dealing with Emmanuel College. Is it possible to ignore commenting on the gapping holes and hold up a vision of diversity that would indeed accept our sacred beliefs as well as everyone else's?
-----------

Perhaps I am wrong (or just simply misunderstand), but I don't think this is possible in many circumstances. To "hold up a vision of diversity" that would accept everyone's beliefs is, I submit, going beyond the teaching of the scriptures in matters of apostacy and the like. It is for Bill Phipps and the postmoderns to "hold up a vision of diversity," not the church (the gathering of believers).

I think this is where I see part of the problem. Yes the church should be a light unto this world. Sometimes that is just shining in the darkness, but it may also be fighting the darkness (Ephesians 6:12). Whatever the case, how is that different when a denomination is where the darkness is emanating from? We are not talking about the people of faith going out into the world to be lights, but about the fact that a community which calls itself a church (the United Church) is teaching that which is contrary to the teaching of Jesus Christ. That's where I keep getting bogged down. What is the proper response to false teaching? I decided to look at the New Testament in this regard. I don't claim to have found every instance of apostacy (false teaching), but the ones I did find say some interesting things.
Certainly we are to always act in love. This means that when correction is necessary it should be done gently. Speaking of sin generally (not necessarily apostasy), Paul writes, Gal. 6:1, "My friends, if anyone is detected in a transgression, you who have received the Spirit should restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness." [NRSV] Our reason for correction/rebuke should be love for the other person and/or love for those being hurt by the teaching.

But what if it continues? What if it is a false teacher? Even Jesus warns us to beware of false prophets. Here is the place I think it relates to discussing "acceptance of all beliefs". If we promote "acceptance of all beliefs" are we not participating in the error? I think that is what John is saying,

2 John 7-11 "Many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh; any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist! Be on your guard, so that you do not lose what we have worked for, but may receive a full reward. Everyone who does not abide in the teaching of Christ, but goes beyond it, does not have God; whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. Do not receive into the house or welcome anyone who comes to you and does not bring this teaching; for to welcome is to participate in the evil deeds of such a person."

Verses 10 and 11 are particularly noteworthy in this regard. When someone is clearly teaching a doctrine that is contrary to the teaching of Christ (and thereby could be harming many people) is the loving thing to do to accept this teaching? My understanding of the scriptures is that it is not the loving thing.

Paul also uses strong language in regard to false teaching. Galatians 1:8-9 "But even if we or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, so now I repeat, if anyone proclaims to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let that one be accursed!" ---------
Can we create in our letters the tone and acceptance that we want to be treated with?
---------

Is that what we want? For everyone's beliefs to be accepted? I thought that was the postmodern view of faith and belief?

Please don't take my questions the wrong way. A better way to put this might be as follows: I want to agree with you Gail that we should "create in our letters the tone and acceptance that we want to be treated with" but this "tone and acceptance" can be two different things for us and for those who hold to a postmodern view. Acceptance for the postmodernist means denying there is absolute truth, and I am not prepared to accept that (no pun intended). If we accept all beliefs as equally valid (that is what the pluralist means by acceptance) then have we not already invalidated the gospel of Jesus Christ?

Too often we mean different things even though we use the same word. Take "tolerance". Christians should be extremely tolerant (to endure) but we are not to be tolerant of evil and falsehood (which is what the postmodernist means by tolerant).

Not in regard to the display issue but in regard to the moderator's statements on Jesus and the like, I believe we must gently correct and rebuke, including speaking against the acceptance of all beliefs. There may even come a point where we should not welcome one who teaches heresy.

I am not promoting (or at least I hope I am not promoting) an intolerance of questions and doubt. There are many people in our congregations and communities who just don't understand these things. We need to "fill the holes" and be a light to these people. I am saying (because I think it is part of the Gospel's teaching) that one should be intolerant (not mean--two different things) of the apostacy within our United Church.

The only exception (in regard to the duty to correct error) that I find in scripture is contained in the Letter to the church in Thyatira. Jesus rebukes this church because they "tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet and is teaching and beguiling my servants to practice fornication and to eat foods sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her fornication." It was pretty bad in the church of Thyatira, so bad that Jesus adds this, "But to the rest of you in Thyatira, who do not hold to this teaching, who have not learned what some call 'the deep things of Satan,' to you I say, I do not lay on you any other burden; only hold fast to what you have until I come.... Let anyone who has an ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches."

If the United Church is as bad as the church in Thyatira, then perhaps we can withhold correction and rebuke, instead just holding fast to what we have in Christ. Have we come to that point? I pray not!

Yours in Christ,
Mark Fearnall

"I solemnly urge you: proclaim the message; be persistent whether the time is favorable or unfavorable; convince, rebuke, and encourage, with the utmost patience in teaching. For the time is coming when people will not put up with sound doctrine..."