Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Essentials and Nonessentials
Last Sunday I finished a series of sermons on "What Makes a Methodist." The last sermon I quoted liberally from Wesley's "Catholic Spirit" sermon. Our focus was on mutual love as a defining mark of Christians and one that takes precedence over many of the specific beliefs and opinions we have. Wesley was also clear, though, that this desire to share love for one another cannot make us mushy about what we believe. We should hold firm to what we beleive are the essentials of the faith while at the same time recognizing that others may hold just as firmly to another set of beliefs. I suggested in the sermon that traditionally for United Methodists, the list of essentials to the faith is pretty short. But I wonder where we might agree and disagree on what is essential. Not for the purposes of starting a debate, but just out of curiosity, what do you think are the "essentials" of Christianity? I'd start with the Great Commission and the Great Commandment, the divinity and resurrection of Jesus. What would you add or take away?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Ha! A question I'm spending three years (and probably a lifetime) pondering. I think the revelation of God in Christ is central (but not that Christ was the exclusive revelation of God). That revelation contains the idea of embodiment, so Chalcedon is satisfied.
Scripture must be central as interpretive lens, but not exclusive of reason, tradition or experience (I just made this up myself this afternoon).
Beyond that, I'm a Methodist too - can't ignore Christ's mandate for the least.
Interesting, Emily, that in each case you put a kind of qualifier on the "essentials" - Christ is central but not exclusive, Scripture is central but not exclusive. I'm a qualifier too. I hate to say anything with absolute certainty. But I wonder at what points we need to speak without qualification?
Post a Comment