MICHIGAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
SYNERGY IN THE BODY OF CHRIST:
THE BEAUTY OF CHRISTIAN UNITY
A PAPER SUBMITTED TO
THE FACULTY
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS IN THEOLOGICAL STUDIES
BY
KIRK D. SCHNEEMANN
PLYMOUTH, MI
JUNE 2006
Accepted:
_______________________________
First Reader
_______________________________
Second Reader
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research paper is to illustrate the value of synergy and cooperation in the Body of Christ in order to see the USAmerican Church fulfill the prayer of Jesus in John 17:20-23 and ultimately preview the vision of Revelation 7:9. The USAmerican church is fragmented and competitive, yet there are compelling reasons why churches and parachurch organizations should work together despite the risks and threats associated with such partnerships.
The first section will deal with ecclesiology. There are many understandings of the term church. Specifically, there is a tremendous difference between the local church and the universal Church. There are differences between churches and parachurch ministries, though they also have much in common. 1 Corinthians 12:14-27 speaks of unity and diversity within the Body of Christ. It refers to individual members of a local church being parts of the Body. A parallel can be made that views local churches as unique parts that form the Body. These local churches can choose to ignore the other parts of the Body or develop synergistic partnerships that allow the product to become more effective than the sum of the parts in achieving the God-ordained purposes of the Church.
The second section will present unity and examples of communities in which local churches have begun to pray and serve together. There is a growing trend in the United States toward cooperative activity amongst churches. Pastors Prayer Summits have proven to be especially effective in the initiation of such endeavors.
The third section will examine the extent to which churches should cooperate. Much is said in Scripture concerning sound doctrine and the dangers of heresy (1 Tim. 1:10, 2 Tim. 4:3, Titus 1:9; 2:1). This paper is not an argument for all local churches to merge with those in the same geographical region, but it does promote the values of complementing one another rather than competing in divisive ways. Jesus prayed in John 17:20-23 that we would be one. The paper will conclude by offering suggestions for those seeking greater unity and synergy in their city.
To the fellow pastors of the Church of Washtenaw County who so love the Bride of Christ.
I also dedicate this to Heather, my faithful bride.
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I want to thank those at Michigan Theological Seminary that have taught, mentored, and guided me through this ministry project: Dr. Brian Tucker, my research guide; Dr. John Jelinek, my first seminary professor and first reader; and Tim Loyola, my professor, pastoral mentor, and friend. Thank you also to my other instructors through my eight-year journey at MTS.
In addition, I deeply love and appreciate the Body of Frontline Church, Ann Arbor. Your prayers, support, encouragement, and friendship fuel my passion for Jesus and His Bride. We are truly together on the journey, the adventure of a lifetime.
I am forever grateful for my colleagues on the staff of the Church of Washtenaw County, also know as the Pastors Alliance for County Transformation (P.A.C.T.). The joys of praying and serving together cannot begin to be adequately expressed in these pages. I have learned so much from all of you and love seeing Jesus in and through your lives. While I treasure my relationship with each of you, I especially appreciate the investments made into my life by Seth Kim, Mark Vanderput, Robert Hill, Phil Tiews, Father Ed Fride, and Joe Sazyc.
Thank you Mom and Dad for your love, example, and for my name (which means church or church dweller; rather prophetic!). Special thanks to the love of my life, Heather, and our three amazing children, Kailey, Rachel, and Trevor. Thank you for your patience as I studied and wrote. You are the best family a man could ever have.
Introduction
On Saturday, August 13, 2005, Montibeller Park in Ypsilanti, Michigan was filled with children. While this is hardly uncommon, the number and purpose of the attendance was unprecedented as thousands of boys, girls, and parents participated in Operation Jumpstart,1 an outreach to children and families in need. It was a remarkable day. Joe Smith said,
It is amazing what can happen when Christians work together. We have never seen churches work together. They are usually arguing, competing, or splitting! To see this…is nothing short of miracle.2
Hundreds of families accessed information from various social services agencies, kids played games, and nearly one thousand filled backpacks were distributed to underprivileged students. Perhaps the greatest aspect of the event was its sponsors—a network of various churches and ministries working together to share the love of Jesus to “the least of these.” The multi-ethnic, multi-denominational Church of Washtenaw County was united, serving as one Body of Christ.
The Church In Action
While three hundred volunteers served the poor in Ypsilanti, people in other communities were making decisions about whether or not to close their church. Others were contemplating church splits. Still people who left their church for another congregation across town angered others. The contrast between the united Church and the divided Church could not be more apparent.
What is the church? How should it function? What is the difference between a local church and the Body of Christ? These are some of the vital questions that will be answered in the following pages.3
Definition of Terms
Although these will be addressed more thoroughly in subsequent pages, there are several key terms that must be understood in order to understand the research that follows.
Body: This upper-case usage is a synonym for the universal Church.
Bride: This upper-case usage is a synonym for the universal Church.
church: In its lower-case form, this refers to the local church.4
Church: In its upper-case form, this refers to the worldwide church composed of numerous local churches.
Ecclesiology: The study of the Church.
Ecumenism: In the broad sense, this is a movement that encourages cooperation amongst religions.
Religion: The human quest to know God, usually done in the context of organized institutions.
Synergy: This is the idea that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
USAmerica: This term refers to the United States of America as opposed to the world or “America,” a term that includes all of North and South America.
USAmerican: A reference to a resident of the United States of America.
CHAPTER 1
THE BRIDE OF CHRIST
The subject of ecclesiology recognizes the distinction between the Church and the local church. In either case form, the word church commonly denotes a building. In some circles, it may refer to a particular gathering of people at a particular day and time. Its biblical use is far more expansive than many in the USAmerican5 culture realize. In fact, much of what is commonly understood about the church—including buildings, budgets, and programs—is abiblical, that is to say it is not mentioned in the New Testament. This makes it neither right nor wrong, but it is worth noting how history and culture have influenced our understanding and practices.
The Church
Defining church is anything but simple. A plethora of words and meanings have been derived from the term. The most common derivation is the Greek e˙kklhsi÷a, ecclesia. Some have linked it to the Greek kuriakon (“belonging to the Lord”) and kirk, the Latin circus, circulus, the Greek kuklos, since congregations gathered in circles.6 Acts 19:32, 41 translate ecclesia “assembly.” Some have described it as “the congregation of the children of Israel.”7 The Hebrew equivalent was lDh∂q, qahal, referring to Israel as a religious body.8 In some cultures, church refers to an architectural structure, yet nowhere in scripture does the word “church” identify a place of worship, but rather a group (or body) of believers, and that only in the New Testament.9 Bauer includes his lexicon references to “the totality of Christians living in one place” and distinguishes appropriately between the Church universal, to which all believers belong, and the local church.10
The Body: 1 Corinthians 12:14-27
The Church is presented through a variety of metaphors in Scripture including a family, an army, a building, a bride, and a body.11 When Paul spoke of the church as a “body,” the metaphor was from a fable widely used in several cultures of antiquity.12 The simple message is that each member of the Church is vital and unique from the others. One scholar wrote that, “…All members are necessary if there is to be a body and not a monstrosity.13 There is tremendous diversity in the body and it is by God’s design. Any sense of self-sufficiency produces a vile stench. Paul even says that the parts of the body that are weaker are indispensable (1 Cor. 12:22-25). This is analogy, not allegory. Paul is saying that appearances deceive. “If one removed an organ because it appeared weak, the body would cease to be whole. So with the church. All the parts are necessary, no matter what one may think.”14
Although God’s heart was for unity, the Corinthian church failed to express it. They needed both unity and diversity, yet they cannot have one without the other. The remainder of the chapter is devoted to diversity.15
The Bride of Christ
The Church is also depicted as a bride in 2 Corinthians 11:2 and Ephesians 5:22-23. The Old Testament shows the relationship between God and Israel as that of a husband and wife (Hos. 1-3; Isa. 54:1-8). Jesus calls himself the bridegroom in Mark 2:18-20 and offers parables of a marriage feast (Matt. 22) and ten virgins (Matt. 25).16
Distinctions of a Local Church
The differences between the Church and a local church are rather obvious. What are not always apparent are the differences between local churches. It is not difficult to imagine the Church as simply those around the world who are followers of Jesus.17 Yet when one ponders the existence of over 1500 Christian faith groups within North America alone,18 it becomes clear that several factors give rise to the formation of a faith community. This is especially true in the Protestant wing of Christianity. Many small communities, for example, have one Roman Catholic church and dozens of Protestant congregations. What separates them from one another and why do they not simply merge together to capitalize on the synergistic opportunities that exist?
Geography
When the first local churches were launched, they were new communities of faith in various cities near the Mediterranean Sea. Expansion meant the formation of new gatherings of adherents to the young movement of Christianity in cities distant from established churches. Geography was a chief concern. What separated one church from another was simply physical distance. Today, this is a distinguishing factor as well, although technology is diminishing the dynamics of spatial proximity. Increasingly, churches are gathering simultaneously in multiple locals to share a common worship experience via video.19 Nevertheless, it is plain to see how distance would necessitate the establishment of more than one congregation on the planet.
Theology
The theological differences that divide the Church into three major groups—Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox—also segment those within, specifically in the Protestant realm. There are significant differences in belief among denominations such as Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists, and Lutherans. Over time, social, political, and theological controversies led to the formation of sub-categories within the major denominations themselves. Statements of faith differ, for example, between Southern Baptists, North American Baptists, Freewill Baptists, and the American Baptists (just to mention a few of the dozens that exist in the United States). Some would argue that the theological differences between local churches are often petty, while others are quite dramatic. They are, nonetheless, a primary reason multiple churches exist.
Methodology
Numerous communities have more than one church of the same denominational persuasion; therefore, geography and theology cannot be reasoned as the sole purpose behind multiple congregations. Instead, it is methodology that makes them unique from one another. This may include the style of music preferred in congregational worship, the ethos of the church, or even the approach to preaching. The differences may include the personality of the leaders and the relational spheres of influence that belong to the members. Whatever the factors, the how of doing church separates one faith society from another.
Cash and Control
There is yet one final factor that divides churches. It is rarely discussed, yet it remains as real as the others. The issue relates to employment and authority of leadership. The merging of two congregations stands as the antithesis of the underlying motivations of pastoral job security and political power. New churches are sometimes planted near existing ones with nearly identical geography, theology, and methodology in order to enhance denominational statistics or offer an individual the opportunity to lead his or her own flock. This is often undertaken in a spirit of competition and pride as one strives to be the “biggest and the best,” seeking church growth rather than Church growth; building one’s kingdom rather than God’s Kingdom. Jesus said that, “whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it” (Mark 8:35) and that we should seek His Kingdom (Matt. 6:33). Much could be said surrounding this matter, yet the mere acknowledgment will have to suffice at this juncture.
A Tasty Metaphor
To illustrate the reality of church distinctions, consider the restaurant industry. Many shopping malls feature a food court that includes numerous options for the consumer. Although they each offer food, the selections of a Chinese restaurant are quite different from a McDonald’s and a Taco Bell. The addition of a Sbarro Italian Eatery would be more suitable than a Burger King if one seeks to create an assortment of eating establishments without cannibalizing the existing businesses. Too often communities have a vast number of small, struggling congregations that are quite similar. Perhaps a careful examination of their differences would reveal common menus that could be differentiated or blended into one, stronger church. Unfortunately, church splits and closings occur far more frequently than mergers. To clarify, this is not to suggest that there should only be one church in a given neighborhood. Instead, the peculiarities should be clear and celebrated while seeking to build bridges with those groups that maintain a similar focus on the essentials. In addition, it is essential to recognize geography and theology are not the only factors that divide Christians into their respective churches.
Diversity is a good thing. God created it. We need it. Donald Miller said:
…there are, honestly, about a million ways Christians worship and about that many ways different groups say a person becomes a Christian. Trusting Christ, really placing all my faith in Him the way Martin Luther did, seemed quite meaningful and simple. It also seemed relational, not formulaic, and as I have said, my gut tells me the key to life is relational, not propositional.20
He continues:
In the battle against evil, we must recognize that whatever particular group we belong to is not the only group of Christians in the world. We can then learn from others who worship the same Christ as Lord and Savior but who may use different language and emphasize different parts of the Scripture from what we do. Perhaps when we lay aside our labels, we will recognize that together we are all Christ’s servants and will then find ways to cooperate rather than to compete in serving him. Without compromising our convictions we can have fellowship (have salt) with one another. We may not think the same thoughts but we will have the same mind in Christ Jesus (Phil. 2:1-4). Our unity will be a sign of what God’s power can do to drive out the evil and chaos infecting our world.21
This is “the holy, catholic church” of the Apostles’ Creed!
CHAPTER 2
UNITY IN THE BODY OF CHRIST
Unity in the Body of Christ is difficult and fragile. It is, nevertheless, essential if the Church is to become or remain—depending upon your perspective—a vibrant force in our world. To oppose or even ignore the quest for unity is sin,22 for this is God’s plan.
Jesus’ Vision for Unity
It is the will of God that the Church is united. Jesus prayed to that end:
My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me (John 17:20-23).
The pages of Scripture are filled with exhortations to be unified. In addition to Jesus’ prayer, we can conclude from Eph. 2:16-21, Eph. 4:4-7, 1 Cor. 3:17, 2 Cor. 8-9, and 2 Cor. 4:9, among others, that the heart of God desires unity. This should be our primary motivation for unity, cooperation, and synergy. Division, destruction, and isolation are tools of the enemy (Matt. 7:13; John 10:10; Gal. 6:8). Reconciliation, harmony, and unity are modeled by—through the Trinity—and sought after by God (2 Cor. 5:19; Rom. 12:16; 1 Pet. 3:8).
The Heartcry for unity
It is no secret that there is incredible division in the Church today. Even when theological differences are acknowledged, tension and strife are common in the relationships (or lack thereof). Some have asked, “Will Christians from all over the world, in various communions, be able someday to eat the body and drink the blood of Jesus Christ together and in peace?”23 The great irony is the divisive nature of communion itself, an act of remembrance that our Lord taught us to practice together, not in isolation.
A Bit of History
Church history is a fascinating study.24 A common mistake is made when contemporary men and women ignore the two millennia that separate the New Testament from the present. There was a day when denominations were unknown and congregational options were unavailable such as the 9th century Photian schism preceding the schism of 1054 that divided the Eastern and Western churches. Even though the split between Catholic and Orthodox branches of Christianity created much division in the Body, it was the period of the Reformation that gave rise to the scores of Protestant denominations that frequently distance themselves from not only their Catholic and Orthodox siblings but also their Protestant ones. Any attempt at unity in the Body must recognize and essentially overcome centuries of history and division if it stands any possibility of success.
As noted previously, it is our sinful nature that strives toward division. Unity is a spiritual matter that requires the working of the Spirit in the lives of believers. Even small children easily notice others who are different, often mocking and criticizing the uniqueness’ of others while pursuing relationships with those that are like themselves. Modernity’s emphasis on individualism undoubtedly contributed to the rise of independent churches in recent decades. It is far easier to isolate than to relate. Simply, the quest for unity is timeless, while the realization of it has been challenging from the beginning. There are two thousand years of church history, councils, writings, and doctrines that must be considered when approaching any discussion of cooperation, especially across denominational boundaries.
COOPERATION
Synergy: a definition
Synergy is:
1. The working together of two or more things, people, or organizations, especially when the result is greater than the sum of their individual effects or capabilities.
2. The phenomenon in which the combined action of two things, for example, drugs or muscles, is greater than the sum of their effects individually.25
Secular examples
In the United States, capitalism has limits. Monopolies are avoided through careful legislation. Competition is encouraged. Mergers must be approved. While these factors are theoretically designed to protect and benefit the consumer, it is clear to the business community that valuable synergy is inevitable in many instances of cooperation. It is commonplace, for example, to see a Baskin Robbins ice cream restaurant and a Dunkin Donuts store under the same roof. They are owned by the same company and recognize the benefits of internal cooperation. Pizza Hut and Taco Bell, both subsidiaries of Yum! Brands, Inc., commonly share the same real estate. The philosophy of placing similar companies nearby, such as in a shopping mall or business district, has been shown to benefit participants when they are viewed as complimentary (and even when they are not!).
How far?
The Church in USAmerica does not have formal laws prohibiting cooperation and partnerships. The universal Church has unlimited opportunities to work together in accomplishing its mission, yet it fails to do so for a number of reasons. The primary reason is not political or sociological but theological.26 The events that led to the Reformation, for example, were substantial and necessary. It is appropriate and healthy to hold to theological convictions that differ from others. At some point, however, decisions must be made concerning one’s affiliations, fellowship, and ministry engagement. What Jesus had in mind when He prayed for unity was undoubtedly a vision of all of His followers being able to proclaim the Gospel in all of its fullness and splendor, acknowledging one Lord, one faith, and one baptism (Eph. 4:5). Exciting possibilities exist, however, when love, grace, respect, and humility replace the oft-present competition that occurs between churches. Theological issues are not insignificant, yet they do not preclude exercises of common prayer, fellowship, social justice, service, evangelism, and worship. This is especially true within Protestantism where denominational splits have led to individuals of the same denominational heading unable to share communion, a rather ironic tragedy.
Examples
Many examples of ecumenism have been demonstrated, especially in the past century. In fact, “Aside from all the terrible things that happened during the twentieth century, the last century will go down in history as the century of ecumenical awakening. The ecumenical movement is one of its few bright points.”27 Leaders such as Charles Colson have addressed the Protestant/Catholic tension in recent years. Again, it is valid to discuss the differences and choose to “agree to disagree” on the fundamental points of contention. Indeed matters of soteriology and ecclesiology are not insignificant, yet there is hope for reconciliation and unity as prayer and dialogue continues. Against the backdrop of alternative religions, there are still many things in common between Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox that can and should be celebrated not only theoretically but also in practical manifestations of the Kingdom of God on earth such as service to the poor, devotion to prayer, and proclamation of Scripture. The Emergent Movement is bringing people of various denominations and theological persuasions together.28 Theological conversation is one of the primary purposes of their interactions as various parts of the Body seek to know, understand, appreciate, and love one another in spite of the serious differences that exist.
Prayer Summits
Mission Portland in Oregon and DAWN in Toledo, Ohio are two citywide movements that have been deeply affected by Prayer Summits. Doug Bannister writes this of his community of Knoxville, Tennessee:
Recently more than fifty pastors from a wide variety of traditions met together for a four-day Prayer Summit. This was the first time anything like this has happened in our town, which has a reputation for division among its churches. The Spirit met us powerfully in the Summit, tearing down relational walls, bringing about unity, and giving us a shared vision for the city. Now pastor prayer cells are springing up all over the community. The movement began when several charismatic brothers who had been praying together invited several evangelical pastors to pray with them.29
PACT
The Pastors Alliance for County Transformation (PACT) of Washtenaw County, Michigan, began in 2000 to “promote unity in order to reach the community.” It had a long and storied history, however, before it received its name and formal recognition. The seeds of PACT began in the 1970s during the heyday of the Word of God Community. This Ann Arbor-based ecumenical organization had a two-fold purpose: to offer expanded ministry opportunities that local churches were unable to offer and promote the growing charismatic renewal movement. This unique group had influence around the world as people from every corner of the globe traveled to Michigan in order to experience this dynamic phenomenon. Their website explains:
The Word of God began in 1967 as an evangelistic outreach to students at the University of Michigan. Initially the group was made up of Catholics, but as the Holy Spirit began to work, people from all Christian backgrounds or no Christian background began to respond. Now Presbyterians, Lutherans, Baptists, as well as Catholics and others all join together to express the unity we share in Christ as members of The Word of God. This experience of unity flowing out of our renewed relationship with Christ continues to be a key element of our identity and our mission.30
In addition to small groups and special events, four churches were birthed from the Word of God movement: Covenant Presbyterian (E.P.C.), Christ The King (Catholic), Cross and Resurrection Lutheran (Missouri Synod), and Emmaus Christian Fellowship (now the Milan and Ann Arbor Vineyard churches). The diverse fruit of the Word of God underscores the incredible variations of theology and tradition that coexisted. Decades later the group continues, albeit in a more modest form.
Another product of the Word of God was a monthly gathering of pastors known as the Pastors United for Prayer and Justice (PUPJ). Despite the occasional special event on Good Friday or the National Day of Prayer, the group concentrated its efforts on its monthly prayer meeting and lunch that featured announcements about issues such as abortion and pornography. After several years pastor Mark Vanderput of Covenant Presbyterian Church suggested the group might go beyond its monthly prayer gathering and take action on truly impacting the community.
The First PACT Prayer Summit
An annual 24-hour prayer retreat was a common fixture in the PUPJ calendar. About one dozen people gathered to pray for one another, the county, and the world. Upon hearing about activity in nearby Toledo, Ohio, and their experience at a Pastors Prayer Summit, it was suggested that Washtenaw County pastors attempt a four-day retreat of their own, guided by facilitators from International Renewal Ministries. In January 2000, fifty pastors were brought to their knees in humility as they confessed sins, prayed for one another, and poured out their hearts on behalf of their community. That event ushered in a new spirit of brokenness, unity, trust, and passion to impact the Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti area. It has become an annual gathering that continues to bring diverse men and women together at the foot of the cross.
Hosanna
The next step in the development of PACT was Hosanna 2001. On Palm Sunday, the Eastern Michigan University Convocation Center was filled with nearly three thousand worshippers from nearly one hundred area churches. It truly represented the Bride of Christ in all of its forms: traditional, contemporary, Catholic, Protestant, Messianic, fundamentalist, charismatic, Asian, African-American, Caucasian, Hispanic, young, old, liberal, and conservative. The theme was Celebrate Jesus and for two hours the Son of God was adored through music, dance, preaching, and prayer. Like the Prayer Summits, Hosanna has become an annual event in Washtenaw County that continues to bring together the numerous parts of the Body.
Operation Jumpstart
The next logical step after pastoral unity and combined worship was service to the needy in the community. The Scriptures are full of admonishments to care for “the least of these” and PACT sought ways to touch the “untouchable” neighbors. In cooperation with the Christian Law Enforcement Fellowship (CLEF), the aforementioned Operation Jumpstart was held on August 13, 2005 at Park in Ypsilanti, Michigan. Previous Hosanna events included a canned food drive, but Operation Jumpstart was the first public outreach of PACT. It will be an annual event.
IM-PACT Prayer Center
On December 8, 2005 at a monthly PACT gathering, Pastor Joe Sazyc shared his vision to leave his local church in order to establish a 24-7 prayer center in Ann Arbor that would serve and support the Church. At the time of this writing, IM-PACT (Intercessory Mission: Pastors Alliance for County Transformation) has begun 18-1 prayer, gathering on Tuesdays from 6 AM until midnight.31 Modeled after the International House of Prayer (IHOP) in Kansas City32 it features non-stop music to accompany the prayers. Worship leaders and prayer facilitators from various churches sign up for particular blocks of time in which to serve. Time will tell whether or not the momentum will grow to reach its non-stop goal. If it does achieve 24-7 status, it will join a growing number of interdenominational prayer centers.
Boiler Rooms
There is a growing underground movement of 24-7 prayer that is literally sweeping the entire world and bringing many different denominations together in one place with one heart.33 The Moravian model of continuous prayer is executed in locales large and small, urban and rural. These centers are uniting the Church, facilitating intimacy with God, and even bearing significant evangelistic fruit. A Boiler Room is a “simple Christian community that practices a daily rhythm of prayer, study and celebration whilst caring actively for the poor and the lost.”34 Also known as “millennium 3 monasteries,” they exist to love God in prayer and to love their neighbors in practice, “contextualized in a community and expressed in a defined location.”35 A 24-7 Boiler Room in Ann Arbor will hopefully soon join those in Kansas City, Calgary, Mexico City, Belfast, Liverpool, London, Frankfurt, among others. Once established, it will undoubtedly be the most tangible and potent expression of unity in Washtenaw County.
Oxygen youth
Another contemporary example of interchurch cooperation is oxygen. This youth group is a cooperative venture of several churches in Ann Arbor that have chosen to work together rather than independently. Each participating church is too small to support a paid youth pastor as traditionally occurs in larger churches. Beyond the financial implications, the group allows more youth to gather together and create a more dynamic critical mass. The factors that differentiate the respective churches, while not unimportant, are typically irrelevant to those students seeking to grow in their relationship with Jesus. It is yet another example of synergy as churches partner together to build the Kingdom of God.
CHAPTER 3
STEPS TOWARD UNITY
Case studies do not in and of themselves provide a compelling basis for action. It is possible, however, to assess the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats that must be considered in the analysis of interchurch cooperation.
Strengths
The most important feature of the pursuit of unity is its biblical basis. It honors and obeys God. In addition, friends and mentors are discovered. Diversity is also celebrated through partnerships. Personal growth and learning are inevitable, affecting not only individuals, but also churches. The Church is strengthened and can accomplish things together it could never do in isolation and separation. Church unity is a powerful witness to the watching world.
Weaknesses/CHALLENGES
Like all relationships, working with other churches requires a commitment of time. Not only are meetings necessary, it takes month and years to develop trust with those that are different from one’s self. Humility is also essential in forging any new relationship. This is especially true when church history and tradition are considered. It is easy to judge others by their label. Cooperation requires the sacrifice of resources that could otherwise be spent on one’s own local church. For these reasons getting a movement established in a community is extremely difficult and time consuming, but worth the effort.
Opportunities
The opportunities that interchurch relationships present are boundless. When we obey God, all things are possible. Unity presents the Church to the world as a unified Bride. It presents the Church to Jesus as an attractive bride. Things can be done together that could never be done alone. The result of unity is a stronger voice for social justice, enhanced stewardship of resources for the poor and oppressed, and a mosaic of art and cultural diversity that surfaces when various parts of the Body interface.
Threats
Perhaps the most common concern raised when the subject of ecumenism arises is heresy. Paul repeatedly warns the early church to be on high alert for those seeking to invade the church with false doctrine (1 Tim. 1:10; 2 Tim. 4:3; Titus 1:9). Despite the declarations of many a postmodern scholar, truth exists. It is found in the Bible, but it most prominently resides in a Person (John 14:6). There will always be controversial issues. As one pastor said, “There are some things that God is silent about and we should be, too.”36 There is tremendous value to discussing the “gray issues” of theology about which there is great debate. Unfortunately, they are often the matters that split churches, denominations, and relationships. Some matters are quite clear, however. Local churches can maintain their unique theological distinctions while participating in the life of the greater Body. The greatest synergy occurs when the focus is on the foundational issues of faith and practice. The motto of one prominent denomination summarizes it rather eloquently, “In essentials, unity, in non-essentials, liberty, in all things, charity.”37
There is a spectrum of beliefs that extends from one’s complete, individual theology that may be completely unique to the universal belief that God exists in some form. A funnel might best visualize this phenomenon. Many critics of ecumenical movements argue that compromise is abominable, yet every gathering of “two or more” is bound to result in disagreement of one sort or another if probing persists. Likewise it is dangerous to consider extensive cooperation in interfaith circles that blur the essential tenants of the Christian faith. Admittedly, many so-called Christian congregations violate these basic beliefs as well.
The establishment of creeds has been one historical manner of defining overarching beliefs that transcend individuals to form mutual understanding and unity. When PACT wrestled with developing a statement of faith, they sought the work of the creeds and settled upon two, one ancient and one modern, to form the basis of theological agreement.38
In addition to heresy, relational walls are a potential threat. All relationships involve a measure of risk. It is all too common for two individuals to agree on theological and even methodological matters while allowing personal injury, history, or misunderstanding to suppress unity. Any engagement with another on any level offers the potential for both love and hate, joy and pain. When brothers and sisters seek to connect, temptation to erect new walls that replace the broken ones will surely follow. The essence of synergy itself announces the strategic value of the ungodly disruption of healthy relationships and a healthy Body. Correction, reproof, and other actions are vital (Prov. 9:8; 2 Tim. 3:16; 4:2). Prayer, grace, and communication39 are essential if any individual relationship, much less a corporate relationship, is to last.
Sin can wreak havoc in any number of ways! Gossip poisons relationships. Slander offends and destroys. Misunderstandings are inevitable and can be handled with grace or malice. We are an army engaged in battle against a real, dangerous enemy that seeks to steal, kill, and destroy (Eph. 6:12; John 10:10). All efforts toward unity must be thoroughly bathed in prayer. Rules of conduct and communication must be understood and practiced (Matt. 18:15-17). The opposition knows that a house divided cannot stand (Luke 11:17). Our enemy’s strategy, which has been very effective, is to divide and conquer.
In the case of denominations and larger authoritative bodies, it is not uncommon for the vision and aspirations of an individual to be muted by one’s superiors. The larger the institution, the greater the pressure to maintain the status quo. As many denominations witness the decline of their membership, protectionism is common. Leaders will do almost anything to protect “their” people and resources from others that are viewed as competition. When people catch a vision for God’s Kingdom instead of their own, however, amazing opportunities arise.
Every movement is prone to decline over time. Entropy destroys momentum. Familiarity breeds contempt. “Mutual witness and service can disintegrate into mere ideological commonality rather than genuine Christian cooperation.”40 The force of agape can become so entrenched internally that the external mission of the Church can be lost. Past successes can become surrogates for present and future initiatives.
Positive Factors in Synergy
Every city and community is unique. Some communities feature churches that are highly competitive with one another, making unity a challenge. In other cities, there is such strong competition from other religions and atheism that people easily recognize the need for one another. There is strength in numbers. In such regions, there is no time or energy to compete with one another. The mission is clear, the task is great, the harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few. One emerging dimension that is enhancing unity is technology. It has never been easier to interact with others, share ideas, and collaborate on projects. Even geographic barriers are shattered through video conferencing, Blackberry devices, podcasting, vodcasting, blogs, and e-mail.
Negative Factors in Synergy
If synergy is so compelling, why would anyone resist such relationships? There are numerous factors that keep churches separated. They are the same ones that keep individual believers from experiencing the unity that Jesus sought from the Father. At the root of division is pride. The deadly flaw of Lucifer continues to plague humanity. Although people are quick to justify their exclusivity, very often it is sheer arrogance coupled with judgment that prevents brothers and sisters from dwelling together in unity.41 Jesus’ words in Matthew 10:34-35 are noteworthy. Conflict between Christ’s children and children of the devil is inevitable.
A more blatant form of pride is prejudice. This is most commonly understood in the context of racism, yet it extends to erect walls of denominationalism that shun the rest of the Body. Sadly, arrogance today is no different from the attitude presented in this 1948 sermon:
I am more tremendously convinced than ever before that the last hope, the fairest hope, the only hope for evangelizing the world on New Testament principles is the Southern Baptist people represented in that convention.42
In contrast, theologian Leonard Sweet says humbly, “80% of my theology is right and 20% is wrong and I don’t know which is which!”43
The greatest factor that keeps pastors and church leaders from seeking unity, according to Dennis Fuqua, is the paycheck factor.44 Parishioners want their needs met. They pay the bills and want to be the recipients of the religious goods and service a local church is to provide them. The reason so few churches have a fruitful evangelistic fervor is that the non-Christians are not the ones that financially support the day-to-day operations of the church. Pastors are afraid of losing people to other churches. It is easier to treat a nearby church as competition rather than taking the risk of losing people to another congregation. Simple busy activity keeps leaders from prioritizing those Kingdom endeavors. Insecure pastors that seek to maintain the current flock and keep them happy rather than risking great things for God’s Kingdom are all too common.
The Body In Action
Rick Warren has identified five purposes of the Church: evangelism, discipleship, worship, service, and fellowship. Here is his assessment:
Most evangelical churches already do the five purpose of the church—sort of. But they don’t do them all equally well. One church may be strong in fellowship, yet weak in evangelism. Another church may be strong in worship, yet weak in discipleship. Still another may be strong in evangelism, yet weak in ministry? Why is this?
It is the natural tendency of leaders to emphasize what they feel strongly about and neglect whatever they feel less passionate about. Around the world you can find churches that have become an extension of their pastor’s giftedness. Unless you set up a system and a structure to intentionally balance the five purposes, your church will tend to overemphasize the purpose that best expresses the gifts and passion of its pastor.45
It is imperative that the Church be engaged in all five purposes. Is it possible, however, that since each church is unique and naturally emphasizing one or more purposes, a synergistic unity of churches working together would allow for specialization without overemphasis or underemphasis? Could it be that God has designed each church to be a unique part of the Body, designed to complement the others in a mutually dependent relationship? This is not necessarily true, but an inference can certainly be made from the metaphor as each local church is unique and serves a unique group of people. Clapp suggests, “The point is the need for all members; otherwise some function of the body would be missing.”46 Perhaps if each church focused on its strengths and partnered with others, the Body would find a perfect balance of the purposes.
The Stakes
It has been said that Christianity is one generation away from extinction. The current state of the Church is anything but healthy. A recent survey by the Billy Graham School of Evangelism at Southern Baptist Seminary revealed that although 65% of builders (born before 1946) were born-again, there is a sharp decrease in the following generations: 35% for boomers (born between 1946 and 1964), 15% for busters (born between 1965 and 1976) and a paltry 4% for bridgers (born between 1976 and 1994).47 Many talk about the United States and its history as a “Christian nation.” While this writer would contend a “nation of Christians” would be far more attractive than a formal church-state relationship, such a possibility in our present culture is beyond possibility without a powerful move of the Almighty. The influence of the USAmerican church is on a decline not unlike that of other western nations in previous years where today many churches have become little more than museums, with the number of tourists far outnumbering that of worshippers.
Billy Graham’s words from 1966 are just as true today:
The evangelistic harvest is always urgent. The destiny of men and of nations is always being decided. Every generation is crucial; every generation is strategic. But we cannot be held responsible for the past generation and we cannot bear full responsibility for the next one. However, we do have our generation! God will hold us responsible at the judgment seat of Christ for how well we fulfilled our responsibilities and took advantage of our opportunities.48
If the USAmerican Church is to thrive, it will be the result of a move of God and a recognition of Church members that we need one another. Jesus prayed for it. Paul promoted it. There is strength in numbers. We will always find things about which we can debate and dialogue. Our differences can actually enhance the beauty of the Bride if conversations speak the truth in love (Eph. 4:15). They can challenge our pride, expand our understanding, and open pathways toward forging new relationships.
In addition, a united Church presents a powerful witness to the watching world all too familiar with religious division and scandal. One of the most damaging things that occurs within Christendom and its witness to the unbelieving world is division. Countless people have shunned organized religion—and often any interest in the Gospel—after experiencing church splits, broken fellowship, and institutional discord. Jesus said that others will know we are His disciples if we love one another (John 13:35). This does not mean we always agree or ignore our differences. The manner in which we treat one another, respect one another, and love one another is critical not only to our personal relationships but our witness. Regardless of whether or not churches in USAmerica grow numerically, they can and must grow in love for God and one another (John 13:34; Rom. 12:10, 16; 13:8; Eph. 4:2, 32; 5:21; Col. 3:13, 16; 1 Thes. 5:11; Heb. 10:24-25; 1 Pet. 1:22; 3:8; 4:9; 1 John 3:11).
Furthermore, the synergy that emerges from churches working together is truly unprecedented, accomplishing mission that could never be done by smaller, individual groups. Our culture is filled with small churches, megachurches, and everything in between. No church can begin to tackle all of the needs of a given community. Each congregation has its own ethos, strengths, and emphasis. We were created for relationships—with God and one another. Tremendous ministry can be accomplished when brothers and sisters work together over time, transcending denominational (and racial) walls that have been erected through the ages.
Above all, unity delights the heart of God. It is not a new church growth strategy. The idea is not built upon mere case studies or theoretical constructs. Though daunting, it is not idealistic or impossible. It is the desire of our Father for His children to be one. Kasper notes:
Jesus’ prayer on the evening before he died, “May they all be one…so that the world may believe” (John 17:21) is, so to speak, his last will and testament for each and every Christian as well as for the Church as a whole. Hence, division among Christians is disobedience and scandal. Only a reconciled Church can carry forward its rightful mission of reconciling.49
The Ultimate Vision of the Body
Regardless of human efforts for or against church partnerships, a day is coming when the Body of Christ will be presented to Jesus as one, unified Bride. It will not be fragmented or mutilated. Instead its parts will be meticulously connected in the formation of a portrait of utmost beauty. Revelation 14:6 paints a vivid picture, “Then I saw another angel flying in midair, and he had the eternal gospel to proclaim to those who live on the earth — to every nation, tribe, language and people.” What a great day it will be! The Church will be built and nothing can stop it (Matt. 16:18).
At every wedding, the groom longs for that moment when his bride turns the corner and heads down the aisle to meet him. There is tremendous excitement in the air as the woman steps forward to make covenantal vows with her love. There is no image quite like a lady in her wedding gown. Yet even the most beautiful woman would appear grotesque if her parts were disassembled. The mere thought of eyeballs rolling, feet hopping, and a torso slithering down the sanctuary center is repulsive, yet that may well be what Jesus sees of His Bride—a collection of attractive body parts separated from one another resulting in visual calamity and minimized effectiveness. Perhaps the day will soon come when we can come together and present Christ with a complete, united Bride that will cause Him delight and joy over the fulfillment of His prayer.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Banister, Douglas. The Word and Power Church. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999.
Bauer, Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, and other Early Christian Literature: A translation and adaptation of Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der Ubrigen urchristlichen Literature. 5th rev. and augm. ed., 1958. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.
Bloesch, Donald G. The Future of Evangelical Christianity: A Call For Unity Amid Diversity. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, 1983.
Boiler Rooms. “What Is A Boiler Room?” Document on-line. Available from http://www.boiler-rooms.com/cm
Braaten, Carl E., and Robert W. Jenson, ed. In One Body Through The Cross: The Princeton Proposal for Christian Unity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003.
Carson, D. A., ed. The Church In The Bible And The World. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987.
“Church.” Young’s Bible Dictionary, ed. G. Douglas Young. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1984.
Clapp, Rodney. A Peculiar People: The Church as Culture in a Post-Christian Society. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996.
Darland, David E. The NIV Application Commentary: Mark. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.
Evangelical Presbyterian Church. “About the EPC.” Document on-line. Available from http://www.epc.org/about-epc
Fee, Gordon. The First Epistle To the Corinthians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1987.
Fuqua, Dennis, director of International Renewal Ministries. Interview by author, 12 Apr. 2006, Portland, OR. Tape recording via telephone.
Gibbs, Eddie and Ryan K. Bolger. Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005.
Greig, Pete, and Dave Roberts. Red Moon Rising: How 24-7 Prayer Is Awakening A Generation. Orlando, FL: Relevant Books, 2005.
Graham, Billy. Just As I Am. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997.
IHOP. “Missions Base.” Document on-line. Available from http://ihop.org/. Accessed 27 Apr. 2006.
IMPACT. “The Intercessory Mission.” Document on-line. Available from http://www.nextga.us/impact/. Accessed 27 Apr. 2006.
Jay, Eric G. The Church: Its Changing Image Through Twenty Centuries. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1978.
Kasper, Walter Cardinal. “The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification: A Roman Catholic Perspective.” In Justification and the Future of the Ecumenical Movement: The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, ed. William G. Rusch, 14-22. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2003.
Kohlenberger, John R., III, gen. ed. NIV Nave’s Topical Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.
Ligon, Greg, Warren Bird, and Geoff Surratt. The Multi-Site Church Revolution: Being One Church in Many Locations. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006.
McNeal, Reggie. The Present Future: Six Tough Questions for the Church. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003.
Miller, Donald. Searching For God Knows What. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004.
Moulton, Harold K., ed. The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978.
PACT. “PACT Beliefs.” Document on-line. Available from http://www.rc.net/org/wps
Religious Tolerance. “Families of Christian Sects and Denominations.” Document on-line. Available from http://www.religioustolerance
Roberts, Wes and Glenn Marshall. Reclaiming God’s Original Intent For The Church. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 2004.
Shelley, Bruce L. Church History in Plain Language. Nashville: Nelson, 1996.
Sweet, Leonard. Soul Tsunami. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001.
________. “Velocity.” Westwinds Community Church conference, 6 Mar. 2003, from notes by author.
Warren, Rick. The Purpose-Driven Church. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.
The Word of God. “A Little Background.” Document on-line. Available from http://www.thewordofgodcommunit
Additional Recommended Resources
Aldrich, Joe. Reunitus: Building Bridges To Each Other Through Prayer Summits. Portland, OR: Multnomah, 1994.
Aldrich, Joseph C. The Purpose of a Prayer Summit [article on-line] Accessed 14 March 2006. Available from http://www.prayersummits.net/
Barna, George. Revolution. Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 2005.
Beckham, William A. The Second Reformation: Reshaping The Church For The 21st Century. Houston, TX: Touch Publications, 1995.
Bercot, David, ed. “The Church.” A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998.
Best, Ernest. “Church.” Harper’s Bible Dictionary, ed. Paul J. Achtemeier. San Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 1985.
Bilezikian, Gilbert. Community 101: Reclaiming The Local Church As Community Of Oneness. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997.
Boa, Kenneth. Conformed To His Image. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001.
Braaen, Carl E., and Robert W. Jenson, eds. In One Body Through The Cross: The Princeton Proposal for Christian Unity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003.
Bruce, F. F. “All Things To all Men: Diversity In Unity and Other Pauline Tensions.” In Unity And Diversity In New Testament Theology, ed. Robert A. Guelich, 82-99. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.
Bryant, T. Alton. “Church.” The New Compact Bible Dictionary, ed. T. Alton Bryant. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1967.
Burke, Spencer. Making Sense of the Church: Eavesdropping on Emerging Conversations on God. Community, and Culture. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003.
“Church.” Young’s Bible Dictionary, ed. G. Douglas Young. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale. 1984.
Claiborne, Shane. “On Evangelicals And Interfaith Cooperation: An Interview With Tony Campolo.” Cross Currents 55, no. 1 (Spr 2005) 54-65.
Dawson, John. Taking Our Cities for God: How to Break Spiritual Strongholds. Lake Mary, FL: Charisma House, 2001.
Dennison, Jack. City Reaching: On The Road To Community Transformation. Pasadena, CA: William Carey, 1999.
Dunn, James D.G. Unity And Diversity In The New Testament: An Inquiry into the Character of Earliest Christianity. Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1990.
Elwell, Walter A. “Church.” Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, Volume 1, ed. Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988.
Fackre, Gabriel. Ecumenical Faith in Evangelical Perspective. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.
Fairbairn, Patrick. “Church.” Fairbairn’s Imperial Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Glasgow, Scotland: Blackie and Son, 1891. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1957.
Frost, Michael and Alan Hirsch. The Shaping of Things To Come. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003.
Fuqua, Dennis. Last Tuesday Featured Cities Conference Call. Portland, OR, 28 March 2006. Telephone conversation.
“Gifts of the Spirit.” Holman Bible Handbook, ed. David S. Dockery. Nashville: Holman, 1992.
Giles, Kevin. What on Earth is the Church? An Exploration in New Testament Theology. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1995.
Guder, Darrell L., ed. Missional Church: A Vision For The Sending Of The Church In North America. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.
Haggard, Ted. Primary Purpose: Making It Hard For People to God To Hell From Your City. Orlando: Creation House, 1995.
Hjalmarson, Len. Leading From The Margins, Part VII: Toward The Future [article on-line] Accessed 14 March 2006. Available from http://www.theooze.com/articles
Hunsberger, George R., and Craig Van Gelder, eds. The Church Between Gospel and Culture: The Emerging Mission in North America. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.
Jay, Eric G. The Church: Its Changing Image Through Twenty Centuries. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1977.
Jenson, Robert W., ed. In One Body Through The Cross: The Princeton Proposal for Christian Unity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003.
Kärkkäinen, Veli-Matti. An Introduction to Ecclesiology: Ecumenical, Historical & Global Perspectives. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2002.
Lewis, Robert and Rob Wilkins. The Church Of Irresistible Influence. Grand Rapids: Zondervan: 2001.
Marshall, I. Howard. “The Meaning of ‘Reconciliation.’” In Unity And Diversity In New Testament Theology, ed. Robert A. Guelich, 117-132. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.
McLaren, Brian. “The Method, The Message, and the Ongoing Story.” In The Church In Emerging Culture: Five Perspectives, ed. Leonard Sweet, 191-230. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003.
McLaren, Brian. A Generous Orthodoxy: Why I Am a Missional, Evangelical, Post/Protestant, Liberal/Conservative, Mystical/Poetic, Biblical, Charismatic/Contemplative, Fundamentalist/Calvinist, Anabaptist/Anglican, Methodist, Catholic, Green, Incarnational, Depressed-yet-Hopeful, Emergent, Unfinished Christian. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004.
McManus, Alex. “Church Planter’s Forum.” Kensington Community Church (Troy, MI) lecture, 14 October 2004, from notes by author.
McManus, Erwin Raphael. An Unstoppable Force: Daring to Become the Church God Had in Mind. Loveland, CO: Group. 2001.
Nussbaum, Matthew P. “Church for a New Generation: Ministry in a Postmodern Context.” D.Min. diss., Indiana University, 2000.
Pastors Alliance for County Transformation. “Operation Jumpstart.” Document on-line. Available from http://www.rc.net/org/wps
Peterson, Jim. Church Without Walls: Moving Beyond Traditional Boundaries. Colorado Springs: Navpress, 1992.
“The Portland Story.” Fan Into Flame, 1996 Clergy Conference for Men. Promise Keepers, 1996. Videocassette.
Regele, Mike and Mark Schulz. Death of the Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996.
Riddell, Mike, Mark Pierson, and Cathy Kilpatrick. The Prodigal Project. Reading, U.K.: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 2001.
Sanderson, Ross Warren. B.F. Lamb, Ecumenical Pioneer. Nashville: Parthenon Press, 1964.
Saucy, Mark. “Evangelicals, Catholics, And Orthodox Together: Is The Church The Extension Of The Incarnation?” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43, no. 2 (Je 2000): 193-212.
Shelley, Bruce L. What Is the Church? Wheaton, IL: Victor, 1978.
Sweet, Leonard I. Carpe Mañana: Is Your Church Ready to Seize Tomorrow? Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001.
Tome, Brian. “Church Planter’s Forum.” Kensington Community Church (Troy, MI) lecture, 9 March 2006, from notes by author.
Tomlinson, Dave. The Post-Evangelical. Grand Rapids: emergent YS/Zondervan, 2003.
Unger, Merrill F. “1 Corinthians 12:12-31: The Church And The Sign Gifts.” Unger’s Bible Handbook. Chicago: Moody Press, 1966.
Washington, Raleigh, and Glen Kehrein. Breaking Down Walls: A Model for Reconciliation in an Age of Racial Strife. Chicago: Moody, 1993.
