Which would you choose - Doctrinal Accuracy or Racial Reconciliation?

[zoonance]

I was the only white guy at an african american coc (if that is the right term these days) church wednesday night.   They are so party line that they put the capital "L" on legalism and literalism.   I suspect they (at least some) would appreciate some different perspectives but not until a deeper relationship develops.  The possiblity of conflict and division would still exist I suspect. The easiest route is not try.  But, east texas still has some serious racial conflicts that need action, not just contemplation.  As an example:  I couldn't raise my hand in bible class when we were asked "How many of us know that the coc is the only true church?"  I was probably the only one who didn't raise my hand!  "Our idol words will send us to hell."  "I'm just trying to make it to heaven."  stuff like that.  Also, the bible studies aren't too deep theologically and clearly they haven't dug very deep.    Great people, but painfully party line.  They adore "The church." What do you all think?

[James Rondon]

Doctrinal Accuracy or Racial Reconciliation?

It's not an either/or.

[zoonance]

sort of is.  They only accept the KJV as well I think.  Many of the members are baby christians, right off the streets.  They take evangelism seriously.  To interject 'doubt' or conflict etc may not be ... prudent, at least not at this time.  Very careful teaching moments may be 'safe' but taking the focus off their historical sureity of doctrine and fully convinced of ministry will have issues.   They are making plans to build a new building as they are meeting in a mortuary.  They have a leadership with a history different than mine.  A white guy stirring up a black congregation?  Oh yes, there will probably be issues if history teaches us anything.  I really don't know for sure if it is "worth it" (causing negative issues)  So, yes, it sort of is.  

[leeford]

If a choice had to be made it would have to be doctrinal accuracy. God's will is more important than pleasing or reconciling with any human.

[Johnb]

Zoo
I have found that like the white CoC the AA churches also have developed more diversity of thought.  Just may not be the case in E. TX.

If a choice had to be made it would have to be doctrinal accuracy. God's will is more important than pleasing or reconciling with any human.

When it comes to how we do worship or hold church I do not believe there is such a thing as "doctrinal accuracy",
Doctrine has to do with matters of faith not human logic on the right way to do church. 

[mike]

Zoo,

I have posted previously about similar concerns in my neck of the woods. My CoC congregation is about 90% white, and about 2 miles from our meeting site is the place where a 100% AA CoC meets.

We first had talks about cooperation and a possible merger about 15 years ago. Fear and differences in focus have slowed this process to an almost halt. As in your town, here the AA congregations are straight out of the 1950s or before in teaching and liturgy.

What we have settled for, at present, is to love each other and agree to speak well of each other, and also to cooperate in ministry efforts. Maybe this can grow into greater real visible unity at some point. I sure hope so.

God works in redemptive time. I am beginning to realize that his time is sometimes longer than I would like. I hope that is not a cop out.

[Johnb]

There are cultural differences between the 2.  An AA CoC has a different style of worship service, their own leadership structure etc.  They view a merger as giving up both leadership and culture.  Why is it important to have folks leave a religious comfort zone for the sole purpose of some supposed unity?  Can we not be one and meet in different homes?     

[mike]

There are cultural differences between the 2.  An AA CoC has a different style of worship service, their own leadership structure etc.  They view a merger as giving up both leadership and culture.  Why is it important to have folks leave a religious comfort zone for the sole purpose of some supposed unity?  Can we not be one and meet in different homes?     

I think we can, and I guess that is the conclusion we have arrived at locally. But we do want to present to the world a model of reconciliation in Christ, and I don't know if our present arrangement adequately demonstrates that reality.

I guess I would have to say that I am conflicted.

[Johnb]

1. I think Christians worry to much about what the world thinks of us and not enough about what Christ thinks.

2.  Folks should feel at home where they attend be it a black in a majority white congregation, a white in a majority black congregation or a racially mixed congregation.

3.  Events can be planed where congregations of different backgrounds can have activities together (Gospel meetings,  Common meal with singing, good works like fixing up homes for seniors and poor. 

4. Unity does not require a politically correct racial mix in every congregation.

[James Rondon]

sort of is.  They only accept the KJV as well I think.  Many of the members are baby christians, right off the streets.  They take evangelism seriously.  To interject 'doubt' or conflict etc may not be ... prudent, at least not at this time.  Very careful teaching moments may be 'safe' but taking the focus off their historical sureity of doctrine and fully convinced of ministry will have issues.   They are making plans to build a new building as they are meeting in a mortuary.  They have a leadership with a history different than mine.  A white guy stirring up a black congregation?  Oh yes, there will probably be issues if history teaches us anything.  I really don't know for sure if it is "worth it" (causing negative issues)  So, yes, it sort of is.

I think I understand. Even so, racial reconciliation is a matter of doctrinal accuracy. Afterall, in Christ "there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female"... there is neither black nor white.

As far as your issues are concerned, is it only that they are KJV only? And, to what extent are they KJV only? Regarding doctrinal accuracy, one should never compromise the truth. Even so, depending on the issue, one can still be longsuffering, and allow for liberty without engaging in compromise.

[normfromga]

I was the only white guy at an african american coc (if that is the right term these days) church wednesday night.  

Could you clarify?  Are you a member of this congregation, just a frequent participant of the Wednesday night bible study, or just a visitor?

And just what are the doctrinal inaccuracies you wish to contest?  Perhaps the SOFCOC is not the only "True Church," but just which of this one's doctrine does it knock it out of contention?

I mean, I am not sure what "Our idol words will send us to hell..."  means, but "I'm just trying to make it to heaven,"  and "...tak[ing] evangelism seriously..." do not sound like the signs of an unhealthy church.

If you seriously believe the leaders and preachers are teaching false doctrine, don't confront them in class, but in private.  Otherwise, wipe the dust off your feet, and walk away.

[zoonance]

I was the only white guy at an african american coc (if that is the right term these days) church wednesday night. 

Could you clarify?  Are you a member of this congregation, just a frequent participant of the Wednesday night bible study, or just a visitor?

And just what are the doctrinal inaccuracies you wish to contest?  Perhaps the SOFCOC is not the only "True Church," but just which of this one's doctrine does it knock it out of contention?

I mean, I am not sure what "Our idol words will send us to hell..."  means, but "I'm just trying to make it to heaven,"  and "...tak[ing] evangelism seriously..." do not sound like the signs of an unhealthy church.

If you seriously believe the leaders and preachers are teaching false doctrine, don't confront them in class, but in private.  Otherwise, wipe the dust off your feet, and walk away.

I used to attend some with them years ago before this group split off from the original "black coc" last year or so (perhaps they have finally caught up with 'us' in that regard?)  I am not a member, just a friend who pops in once in a while.  I can't just up and leave our congregation.  We are small and my family's presence is palpable.  However, it makes no sense to speak of the power of Christ to unite, when it is so pathetically weak to do so?  It isn't about worrying about what the world thinks.  It is about going about family business.  One sister says lots of people talk about reconciliation but nobody does anything about it.  It isn't easy and I believe that is the honest reason few are willing to work at it.  Certainly, excuses for not trying or why it can't be done are legion and likely justified.

Any charismatic group can build converts.  Converting people to the church is easier than converting people to Christ.  I don't believe it is the same thing.     

Idol word comment comes out of the bible.  If we christians say something that is untrue, unkind etc, we will go to hell unless we repent.   That is the unfair synopsis due to time limitations.     Working one's way to heaven is not a unique perspective.  The bible speaks frequently of our responsibility.   But it also speaks of security.

[Johnb]

Quote Zoo
Any charismatic group can build converts.  Converting people to the church is easier than converting people to Christ.  I don't believe it is the same thing. 
   
 True.  It is also true that extreme legalistic "one true church" preaching can convert t6o the church instead of Christ.  Many are looking for concrete answers and will respond to what they see as the answer to their life problems.

[janine]

Sometimes all you can do is keep holding to a "different" brother's hand, whether across the aisle or across the town.  Go on about your Christian walk and keep holding hands in this dark world.

In my husband's SOFCOC where he grew up, the racial mix has been back and forth, depending on who had more kids, who was working out of town on a given Sunday, who was well, who was ill... But, just as an average, they went anywhere from 50/50, to 35/70 Black/White.

And the bulk of the Whites were for a long time Cajuns, and that means "country" and Southern French Catholic roots -- and the bulk of the Blacks were for a long time basic Af.Am. with "country" and Southern Catholic influence at their roots.

So, therefore, most of the Caucasians and most of the African-Americans with roots in the area were a lot more like each other than they were the new outsiders brought into the mix by their employment in the Oilfield, Military, Agriculture, Healthcare, Education, etc.

Still, historically, there had been two separate congregations, although some efforts at cooperation went on all along.  Then as time went on, the White congregation moved to what was then a rather suburban area (right in town, now!).  They had a little larger facility -- and when problems arose with the older place the Black church met in, eventually all the elders of both churches worked out a schedule for both groups to have separate worship services in the "White" building.

This happened quite some time after most people would have had a problem with it.  It wasn't that a merger was anathema to people -- although I am sure there were some folks on both sides too set in their ways to accept a merger!  What they were trying to accomplish was to get the people together in whatever ways they could that would allow both groups to feel they retained an identity, and their "own" preacher, etc.  You know, not to lose the personality or culture of the congregation.  Not all in one blow anyway.

Having them all meeting together spacewise but not timewise was a good move.  All too soon, it started to look pretty darn silly to keep the two groups apart, when spontaneous togetherness kept on happening!  People were finding ways to serve together, for example dragging a new friend along from the other congregation if they wanted to go do a Bible study with a person of opposite race.  Common meals were eaten and projects about the grounds mushroomed into cooperative efforts and as time went on nobody worried much or even really noticed who was what race.

So eventually there was a merger, as painlessly done as is possible with us silly humans of all colors.

I know what is meant by the party line, the worship of the Church, in some of those Black congregations.  But, see, I bump into it visiting White congregations too.  How fast that parochialism disappears often has to do with what educational opportunities the members have had, regardless of race.

[Bocephus]

Why just worry about the "AA" CofC around the corner?  What about those other folks who "believe and are baptized?"  Can't reconcile with them folks because they don't have the right SOF?