In the last probe, we discovered that the church is "visible" in the sense that it is the embodiment of the Spirit. We also noted that it is not individualistic but as an assembly involves a plurality of people by definition.
Today we want to follow up briefly with some thoughts on Ephesians 4:4--"There is one body and one Spirit." To be sure, we each have the Holy Spirit individually (next post). But we are prone today to see the corporate Spirit in the "universal assembly" as simply the sum of the Spirit in the individual members. This is wrongheaded at least in terms of the perspective of Paul.
Paul and all the biblical writers and audiences were primarily collectivist personalities. What this implies is that they identified themselves as individuals primarily in conjunction with the groups to which they belonged. They did not see groups as a collection of individuals, but individuals as members of groups.
We can of course ask whether this is a cultural or timeless element of the biblical perspectives. But let's be sure to get the biblical perspective right. Paul's way of thinking would not have been "we each have the Spirit which adds up to the body of Christ which the Spirit inhabits." Rather, he would have thought, "we each have the Spirit because we are part of the body which the Spirit inhabits."
This raises a serious question. Is it possible for an individual to possess the Spirit and not be connected to the body? A severed finger might possess life for a few moments, but detached from the "spirit" of the body, it will soon die. This analogy seems true to the inner logic of Paul's thought as well. It seems more than possible that Paul would not thought it possible for an individual to have the Spirit in disconnect from the rest of the body of Christ.
And it is the body of Christ we are talking about here. Once again, we remember that a primary category for Paul is that believers are "in Christ." The logic of Galatians 3 is that the promise is not to seeds, as to many, but to the seed, which is Christ. We are thus, collectively in Christ as the singular seed. We thus do not have, strictly speaking, a one-on-one relationship with the Spirit. We have a plurality-on-one relationship with the Spirit through the singular Christ, who as head of the body nourishes it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Ken, thanks for this discussion. I assume this is for the Wesleyan Doctrinal Symposium? Anyway, here are a few of my thoughts after reading this post.
1. It is interesting that you have made the argument that the visibility of the church is due to its embodiment of the Spirit. Calvin and other Reformers seem to take the Spirit's presence in the Church as a sign of the ecclesial body's invisibility (I'm thinking specifically of Calvin's reply to Bishop Sadeleto and letter to Francis the 1).
2. Jumping off of #1, it would seem that your thoughts are more likely to condemn the schism existing among churches today. Or, your thoughts could be read as assuming that the visibility of the Spirit throughout the mutiplicity of demoninations is evidence not only of the Church's visiblity but also the legitmacy of these churches that have splintered away from the Catholics at one time or another.
3. So what I'm really interested in is not the question of individuals possessing the Spirit and yet remaining a part from the body, but rather the idea of individuals as a part of a group which has separated itself from communion with the larger body. What happens when we separate ourselves from the plurality whether in thought or action (Wesleyans are not part of the World Council of Churches).
4. Finally, what do we do with baptism? If Wesleyans are going to have a symposium on eccelsiology, they need to deal with the baptism issue. Currently, Wesleyans allow infant or Believer's baptism with no significant theological reflection undergirding or promoting either practice (at least as written in the discipline). In the New Testament, not only does Believer's baptism appear to be the norm, but it also coincides with a person's participation in the Holy Spirit as they are brought into this plurality-on-one relationship as you have described it. I'd love to see a paper specifically address the question of Wesleyans and baptism
Thanks muchly Kevin, perhaps the main reason to put these thoughts out here is to raise issues I haven't thought of and critique missteps and ultimately to enrich the symposium by the plurality of minds and involved.
I haven't read the Calvin piece you mention (surprise ;-), but suspect we are not necessarily differing too widely. I am studiously avoiding language of the invisible church not because I disagree with what it usually means (namely that the church is not restricted to some visible denomination or church group). I am emphasizing a different point, namely, that invisibility is not an argument for pure individualism.
However, I think your point is well taken. Whatever form it might take politically, it seems individual groups have a problem to the extent that they are not reaching out and connecting in conversation the entirety of the rest of the body.
I may note your thoughts here in the paper. Thanks!
"I am emphasizing a different point, namely, that invisibility is not an argument for pure individualism."
Great point, especially one that needs to be hard by a protestant evangelical denomination. But the converse I think has to be argued as well as you have noted. This is that if invisibility is not an argument for pure individualism, then it it must stand as an argument for a communal aspect informing the political nature of the church. Thus, we have to begin asking ourselves how the visibility of the church as proclaimed in Ephesians is often contradicted by our equally visible actions? And not only our actions which separate us from other Christians in a contemporary setting, but also those actions which alienate us from the greater communion of the saints. My friend and I wrestled with this concept earlier in the year and ended up posing a meager solution by having a joint Wesleyan and Baptist good Friday service. Next step, Easter.
Post a Comment