Love and Differences

Sean's post yesterday about the birthday of Pentacostalism got me thinking about how far we've all come. It is sad to consider that for the better part of those years, Pentecostals and Holiness folk (The larger Wesleyan tradition) did not get along well at all together. And 98% of that disagreement was over one spiritual gift and the perception we have of it. As a matter of fact, even growing up in my church, I was still taught that 'tongues' was at best, the least of all giftings. This was a marked improvement over the generation of my parents who believed that 'tongues' was not only not a gifting of the Spirit, but the work of the Devil. As such, Pentecostals who spoke in tongues were considered un-Christian. The truly absurd part of this is that the Wesleyan tradition is almost identical to the Pentecostal movement in virtually every other way. In some ways, the Wesleyan tradition honored practices even more "obscure" than 'tongues.' If you were to attend an early Holiness camp meeting and measure it from a modern perspective, it would look nearly identical to modern day Pentecostal meetings with the notable exception of speaking in tongues. Yet, despite all the differences, the Holiness churches refused to even interact with Pentecostals because of this one small difference.

And the Pentecostals don't get off the hook either. The instance that the gift of 'tongues' was a requirement for sanctification, and in some churches even for salvation, is patently un-Biblical. It is placing dogma before the inspired Word of God and it made resistance even more intense. Likewise, some of the extremes of Pentecostalism have created deep controversy and schism within the Church. Sean and Crchair will remember an unfortunate series of events at Houghton that came about because of some of the worship leaderships' close ties to the Airport Fellowship.

However, it is very satisfying to see the gap between Pentecostals and Wesleyans (Again, the larger tradition and not just the denomination) closing. The extremists on both sides have found their voices limited in the past decade and we now even have a society dedicated to re-discovering the bonds between our two traditions.

So what do I hope to convey by this history lesson? If you've stuck with this piece for that long, you probably already know it. The point is that we, as a Church, are too prone to allowing dogma and personal judgments dictate who is "acceptable." It is stupid, to put it mildly, for two groups of Christians striving for the same goal to battle each other over minor points of doctrine. The Church faces a slew of enemies from every direction, and the thing we need most is internal strength.

For those of us in these traditions and to those in others, I offer two quotes from Wesley that I find relevant on a daily basis:

"When I was young I was sure of everything; in a few years, having been mistaken a thousand times, I was not half so sure of most things as I was before; at present, I am hardly sure of anything but what God has revealed to me."

"In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, love."