Corporate Rule Of Life

Christian ethics and theology with an Anabaptist perspective
Heirbyadoption
Posts: 1012
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 1:57 pm
Affiliation: Brethren

Corporate Rule Of Life

Post by Heirbyadoption »

I don't wish to beat a dead horse, but neither have I ever seen an out and out clear answer to the following questions, and the question has repeatedly come up in a few different conversations I've wandered into lately; if I have simply missed the answer, please direct me to it and this thread can be removed posthaste. I recognize there is a diversity of opinions here, but this particular thread is intended more for those who are part of (or in favor of) establishing a corporate rule of life and practice among their congregation or fellowship. See the linked article from Ernie for an excellent expose of the benefits of a corporate rule of life. Thank you in advance for respecting this.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Heirbyadoption wrote:
Ernie wrote:Here are some of my thoughts on this topic.

https://www.plainnews.org/wp-content/up ... f-Life.pdf
Thank you for sharing that. It certainly expresses many good benefits of having a corporate rule of life. But it doesn't really answer the questions which seem like they would be fundamental ones prior to expanding on those benefits. Would be glad for your perspective on them specifically.
Do we have Biblical authority to do so? ... At what point our extraBiblical applications/legislations become Divine-command-violating-traditions such as Jesus warned about?
Perhaps these things are non-issues for some. From discussions with folks on here and throughout Anabaptist circles, they are a major question in the mind of many, especially in my generation; not to seek an escape so much as in recognition that we have inherited much of our faith in practice rather than having primarily developed it through personal conviction, coupled with the privilege of looking back on history and seeking where the car has left the rails at times (for a variety of reasons). In that recognition, I get the distinct impression (again from my generation especially , being the late 20s-early 40s) that we desire to establish a solid Scriptural foundation if we are going to commit to upholding various practices or corporate rules of life. Certainly this is the case for myself.

So, to the quote questions, there seem to be 5 realistic possibilities. Where there is overlap from your article, Ernie, I apologize. And if I have missed it, I also apologize, but I didn't see your article address these so much as promoting the benefits and practicality of having a corporate rule of life. Perhaps I need to reread it more thoroughly? :oops:

1. The Scriptures explicitly teach the establishment of a corporate rule of life.
2. The Scriptures promote the benefits of the establishment of a corporate rule of life.
3. The Scriptures are silent on establishing a corporate rule of life.
4. The Scriptures caution against the dangers of the establishment of a corporate rule of life.
5. The Scriptures are explicit against establishing a corporate rule of life.
0 x
joshuabgood
Posts: 2815
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 5:23 pm
Affiliation: BMA

Re: Corporate Rule Of Life

Post by joshuabgood »

1. The Scriptures explicitly teach the establishment of a corporate rule of life.
In this case the answer is simply no. The scriptures do not explicitly teach that this should be done. It could possibly be extrapolated from things like the Jerusalem Conference...but it certainly isn't taught explicitly. Paul does not say to create, when you plant a church, a corporate rule, standards, vision statement, mission statement, covenant, confession or any such thing.

2. The Scriptures promote the benefits of the establishment of a corporate rule of life.
No. The scriptures give no direct promotions on the subject as laid out by Ernie. Which is why he had to write it =).

3. The Scriptures are silent on establishing a corporate rule of life.
It depends who you ask. I would not say they are completely silent. One can make reasonable inferences that the early church at Jerusalem did create some "extra rules." Additionally, in tension with that, one can make reasonable inferences that Paul explicitly taught there is danger in manmade additions (or religious traditions) being added to the good news. Also there is some good evidence that Paul himself walked back some of the Jerusalem Conference prohibitions later in life.
4. The Scriptures caution against the dangers of the establishment of a corporate rule of life.
Yes. Paul definitely seems to caution against adding things to the good news. As does Jesus...not adding a "jot or title" as the KJV notes.

5. The Scriptures are explicit against establishing a corporate rule of life.
No. There seems to be some evidence that the early church did decide on some practical things...like eating meat offered to idols, etc.
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23827
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Corporate Rule Of Life

Post by Josh »

What does "submission one to another" mean?
0 x
joshuabgood
Posts: 2815
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 5:23 pm
Affiliation: BMA

Re: Corporate Rule Of Life

Post by joshuabgood »

Josh wrote:What does "submission one to another" mean?
It might, and it does mean something, but it doesn't "explicitly" call for developing a corporate liturgy. My wife and I submit to each other but we don't have an explicit "corporate rule of life" or marriage liturgy.

It doesn't mean that Paul should have submitted to Peter and company and engage in ethno and cultural centrism. It didn't seem to mean that he and Barnabas always saw eye to eye.

It might mean agreeing to start church at 10:00 and not 9:00. It might mean agreeing to let some else do the preaching/talking. Or it might mean agreeing not to have a Superbowl Sunday service....
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23827
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Corporate Rule Of Life

Post by Josh »

It might mean agreeing to help each other live out the scriptures in the present day. It’s obviously scriptural not to be covetous and a gluttonous eater, but I need help from my brethren to figure out how to actually apply that to my day to day life.

Remaining unstained by the world is hard. It helps to have other people who help me with guidelines about how to do that. Incidentally, in my church setting, we have “guidelines”, not “rules”. They are boundaries that help me determine if I am living out the scriptures as my brethren understand the scriptures to be speaking. I think that’s really helpful to me.
0 x
Heirbyadoption
Posts: 1012
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 1:57 pm
Affiliation: Brethren

Re: Corporate Rule Of Life

Post by Heirbyadoption »

Josh wrote:It might mean agreeing to help each other live out the scriptures in the present day. It’s obviously scriptural not to be covetous and a gluttonous eater, but I need help from my brethren to figure out how to actually apply that to my day to day life.

Remaining unstained by the world is hard. It helps to have other people who help me with guidelines about how to do that. Incidentally, in my church setting, we have “guidelines”, not “rules”. They are boundaries that help me determine if I am living out the scriptures as my brethren understand the scriptures to be speaking. I think that’s really helpful to me.
Call it what you will, if you CAN be disciplined or censured for an infraction of the guidelines, they are rules...

My question remains (for you or anybody on here), regardless of whether such things are helpful, do you see the scripture giving authority to congregations to create agreements (aka corporate rule of life, guidelines, etc) by which we may admonish one another or even require of others who wish to join with us us after the creation of said corporate rule? This question is (perhaps inadvertently) rarely answered explicitly and we easily move on to why we should do thus or what benefit it will bring or where we need to be cautious with it. I'm just asking about ground zero. Some, as JoshBGood said, use Acts 15 to justify the creation of as many extraBiblical agreements as they feel to. Others take Matthew 15 or Mark 7 as strong advice to avoid the creation of such agreements beyond the explicit and blatantly implicit teachings in scripture.

I'm just asking for a few brave souls to essentially say that:
A. you believe the Scriptures allow us to create corporate rules of life as congregations and why you don't believe its contrary to the Scriptures, or
B. you don't believe we have the authority to create and enforce guidelines/rules/etc beyond the explicit or blatantly implicit teachings in Scripture and what in the Scriptures would lead you to that conclusion.
Ernie skimmed the surface very well, but with honest respect for his article, to my mind he's working on framing while my question is still here in the footers of the foundation. As a related aside, the thought is sometimes presented that if someone truly desires to affiliate with a group, they ought to be willing to submit to the corporate rule of life which the group has already established, rather than trying to change the group. Firstly, this creates a presumptive dichotomy about the individual who desires fellowship with such a congregation. Secondly, it is actually a secondary issue to the foundational questions of this thread. Hence, I would strongly encourage it be left out of any answers to the above paragraph, at least for now.

Thanks.
0 x
lesterb
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:41 pm
Location: Alberta
Affiliation: Western Fellowship
Contact:

Re: Corporate Rule Of Life

Post by lesterb »

This perhaps isn't a good argument. But I feel that the very structure of the NT writings assumes that someone will interpret the principles it contains. Like Josh said, it condemns some things that it doesn't define. It promotes other things that it doesn't define, like modesty and simplicity, etc. This lack of definition seems to imply two things: That the definition may change depending on a person's environment, and that someone needs to interpret the principle. The NT also states that no prophecy of the scripture is for private interpretation, which implies group interpretation.

However, according to Galatians and other passages, interpretation (which eventually evolves into tradition) must never become more important than Biblical principle. Does anyone else remember the following analogy? I think it comes from the original MennoDiscuss
The Analogy of the Red Chair..


Suppose God made a LAW that says Thou Shalt Not Sit in Red Chairs...

The role and responsibility of spiritual leaders would be to pass this teaching on to the next generation and perhaps to give ways that the 'rule' could be best obeyed in their particular day and age.

So the next generation of leaders makes a suggestion that God's people should never be within ten feet of a red chair... This 'fence' is a helpful tool to help people in their desire to follow God's Law... but now an insidious process has begun...

The next generation inherits the new 'suggestion' as a 'rule' and adds on their own "helpful" addition. "It is wrong for God's people to even look at red chairs" There, that should help the people deal with temptation.

Further generations add "God's people must never be in the same room as a red chair" and then "God's people must never be in the same HOUSE as a red chair... and then "God's people must all have only BLACK plain simple chairs..."

Eventually, much of the religious leaders time is taken up debating whether or not it is spiritually lawful to shop at IKEA!!! and what to do to discipline the one who has a yellow chair... and whether or not to have 'fellowship' with other people who sit in other chairs than black...

A whole lineage of rules and regulations that God never intended thus evolves around this one topic. Avoiding sin has been systemized, righteousness has been mechanized and little room is left for deviation and diversity.

Many 'traditions' have been built around Scripture... While they may be based on Scripture and Biblical principles originally, they (like religious traditions in Jesus' day) have become a collection of "heavy burdens" (Jesus words) that were a stumbling block to simple faith (Matthew 23:4)

Jesus had little tolerance for those teachings that made faith a complicated and burdensome matter...
0 x
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: Corporate Rule Of Life

Post by Hats Off »

To continue where Lester left off - the story of the roast pan. Mother was preparing a roast while her teenage daughter watched. She said "Mom why do you always cut off the end of the roast when you put it into the roast pan?" Mother "That is how I learned to do it from my mother." So the teen ask Grandmother "Why did you always cut off the end of the roast before you put it in the roast pan?" Grandmother "Because the roast was too large for my roast pan."

Now to a more serious attempt to explain some of the grounds or authorization to make rules that are binding on all and can subject one to discipline, we look at Matthew 16:18-19. "on this rock I will build My church and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." I will say that this passage along with Matt:18: 15-20 gives us, the church, the authority to come up with some minimum requirements for a common church life.

These verses are the foundation for the Corporate Rule of Life that Ernie describes and do give the church authority to make some rules. How this is done and how it is enforced is another matter, some of which Ernie addresses well.
0 x
Wade
Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 12:09 am
Affiliation: kingdom Christian

Re: Corporate Rule Of Life

Post by Wade »

Is it possible that corporate rule does two things?

1. For some it exposes there heart and motives in being honest with ourselves and others rather than actual focus on the rule?
2. For some it is a place to hide there heart and motives with ourselves and others by focusing on the rule?

Didn't the Pharisees use the law to justify themselves while Christ used the law in the sermon on the mount to expose ours hearts?
0 x
joshuabgood
Posts: 2815
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 5:23 pm
Affiliation: BMA

Re: Corporate Rule Of Life

Post by joshuabgood »

I don't see Matthew 16 as a rule making mandate. Rather a matter of judgement and spiritual discernment. It might include practical applications but it isn't explicitly or only about that I don't think. Hence the gates of hell comment.
0 x
Post Reply