Faith is a Long Walk, Not a Checklist

If you listened to a lot of the loudest Christians in the world today, you might think that Christianity is a program with an exacting checklist to follow. Perform these rules and rituals in exactly the right way and you can be part of the chosen. This is historically and even ethically wrong. I’m not arguing against your own personal beliefs as I have many of my own. While we can never be certain about anything, even the very existence of God, we must act as if we know what is true in our lives.

Kierkegaard asserted that humans simply lack access to objective certainty about ultimate truths such as God’s existence, eternity or the meaning of life. Our reason cannot reach the infinite. However, that limitation doesn’t free us from choice. In fact, for Kierkegaard, the choosing, the inward and subjective response to our uncertainty, is the whole point. Because we cannot know the ultimate truth, we must make a “leap to faith,” when we choose the Christian faith. We must commit to living our lives, “as if,” the faith is true even without certainty and proof. In fact, certainty and proof destroy the inward nature of faith, take away our own personal responsibility in choosing faith and take away the life-giving risk that the choice entails.

It may seem quite tidy to think of faith as a kind of to-do list to get into Heaven, yet the reality is that none of us can ever know these ultimate truths. To know would go beyond our human limitations and would reduce the complexities of our faith life down to a binary choice of resignation or rebellion. And so, we live into a faith that is over 3,000 years old, made up of many living families of belief, worship and practice. To insist that it must conform to a particular set of beliefs steamrolls centuries of diversity and debate into a modern narrowmindedness.

I wish Jesus gave us a checklist. But from the earliest days, Christians have been arguing about who Jesus was, what scripture was, how scripture and tradition develop, what rituals are essential and how the church should be organized. The debates were heated but before Christianity became the state religion of Rome under Constantine, most Christians were comfortable holding these ambiguities together. Eventually these debates created the major branches of faith we recognize today: Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy, the Church of the East, Anglicanism, Protestantism in a multiplicity of forms, Pentecostal and charismatic movements, and many independent and indigenous churches around the world. Each of these faith traditions reads the Bible through different theological lenses, honors different authorities, and structures worship and sacrament differently.

Some splits were political, regional and more about power than theology. But that doesn’t preclude the reality that most splits were not a matter of secondary issues. There were core doctrines that forced Christians apart. Matters of Christology were largely debated into the fifth century (and frankly, go on quite robustly today), papal authority, liturgical practices, soteriology and then finding a world-changing focus in the Reformation with issues of authority taking center stage.

In your next Bible study ask everyone four questions: What is the meaning of salvation? What are the sacraments? What is the role of baptism and what counts as a valid baptism? How do you understand Biblical authority? Unless your church is kind of cultish, I’d be shocked if you find two people who give the exact same answers to all.

I think if I had to boil down the most shared touchpoints, it might look like this:

• Jesus is central: If you don’t think Jesus is definitive in your life, then why be a Christian? Interestingly, this doesn’t mean you have to believe in a literal resurrection or even be a theist.
• The Bible matters: At the very least, the Bible points to Jesus in many ways. That doesn’t mean you have to think it is inerrant or even inspired. There are many ways to approach biblical authority.
• Community matters: communal worship and debate help form us spiritually. This usually includes baptism and a eucharistic meal, but variations here are wide.

Walk much further from these areas and you immediately encounter diversity:

• Belief in Christ: Do you say the creed? Do you have a high or low Christology or hold both in tension? Is Christ present in the sacrament? What do we even mean by belief?
• Atonement: There are many models of atonement such as penal substitution (Christ bears a penalty on our behalf for sin), Christus Victor, moral influence, ransom and more. As a universalist, I cannot find a favorite in that list even though most Americans are taught some kind of substitutionary atonement. I tend to drift into the Eastern Orthodox concept of theosis (participation in the divine life) if pressed, but overall, I trust God wants to reconcile all in all and I’m less concerned with the mechanics.
• Baptism: I was dunked as teenager as a statement of my belief. My wife and sons were baptized as infants as a sign of covenant and incorporation into the church family. If either was more important than the other, I think Jesus would have been clearer.
• Authority: Do you have a Pope, bishops, some kind of congregational polity or do you just follow a popular mega-church personality? Do you believe in sola scriptura as your statement of authority? Are you a mystic who seeks a personal connection to Christ?

I’ve barely scratched the surface here, but my main point is that insisting on one “true,” Christianity is quaintly starry-eyed. It’s also inaccurate and unhelpful. It misunderstands our rich history. I love that we can delve deep and dabble in various forms of Christianity and I believe Christ is cool with all of it. There are millions of people who practice the faith differently than you do yet we all trace our faith to the same Jesus. Arguing about these matters is important intellectually, but insistence only fuels division. Seeing one element of Christianity as legitimate at the expense of other ideas shuts faith down.

There is a healthier way, and surprise, it involves humility. Again, there is nothing wrong with holding strong theological convictions. I mean, you’re reading my blog right now where I bloviate endlessly with opinionated fervor. But reaching some clarity in your faith life requires considering ambiguity with humility. It’s edifying to learn how different people can follow the same Lord in so many ways. So, learn each other’s languages before you dismiss each other. Get comfortable with the fact that God must not care that much about the smaller details (which is the majority of all our practices), or else God would make it clearer. Live and let live. Hold your convictions but do so with charity. Isn’t it a great relief that we can change our minds, explore our history, try on various faith traditions and continuously improve our theology based not just on history but on new discoveries?

I would challenge you to read theology far beyond your own faith tradition. Don’t get locked into what ideas are “biblical,” or not because none of us read the Bible the same way. Have some curiosity. Relax more, your salvation depends on nothing but God’s grace. Get excited by the history of our faith in the same way you might get excited about different eras of jazz, art, food, fashion and furniture making. Some excellent places to start:

• The World Council of Churches list of member churches
• Christianity 101: Tracing Basic by James W. White
• A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and, by Karen Armstrong