Comments on: RE: The Spirituality of the Church and 1 Cor. 6:1-11 http://deregnochristi.org/2007/05/18/re-the-spirituality-of-the-church-and-1-cor-61-11/ Christ's Kingdom sacred and secular Tue, 28 Feb 2012 12:50:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Andrew Matthews http://deregnochristi.org/2007/05/18/re-the-spirituality-of-the-church-and-1-cor-61-11/#comment-827 Tue, 29 May 2007 05:38:07 +0000 http://deregnochristi.org/2007/05/18/re-the-spirituality-of-the-church-and-1-cor-61-11/#comment-827 Certainly there has to be canon law (formal procedural principle), but there should (in my view) be ways to circumvent red tape in order to speed the process in order to provide relief for whoever might be suffering. The process is not an end-in-itself, but should be in place in case of hierarchical abuse. Also, the absence of civil penalties by itself makes the church a more informal setting for conflict resolution.

Since I agree that ecclesiastical and civil jursdictions should not be collapsed into one another, I agree that zoning laws should be left to city gov’t. However, in cases of personal conflict, the church should ideally be the first court of arbitration after informal negotiations break down.

]]> By: D Hart http://deregnochristi.org/2007/05/18/re-the-spirituality-of-the-church-and-1-cor-61-11/#comment-826 Sun, 27 May 2007 21:27:23 +0000 http://deregnochristi.org/2007/05/18/re-the-spirituality-of-the-church-and-1-cor-61-11/#comment-826 I agree mainly with Mr. Matthews, except the point about church dealings being informal. Has he ever read the OPC’s BCO? Has he ever witnessed an appeal to presbytery or GA against a session that didn’t have its procedural house in order?

Even so, the point of 1 Cor. 6 doesn’t seem to give the church jurisdiction over civil affairs. If one Christian objects to another Christian’s decision to put a driveway within twenty feet of the property boundary, session may help the brothers come to a common understanding. But the township still decides if the driveway complies with zoning restrictions. In fact, the township decides zoning, not the church. I don’t see Paul here saying otherwise.

]]> By: Andrew Matthews http://deregnochristi.org/2007/05/18/re-the-spirituality-of-the-church-and-1-cor-61-11/#comment-825 Sat, 26 May 2007 23:40:36 +0000 http://deregnochristi.org/2007/05/18/re-the-spirituality-of-the-church-and-1-cor-61-11/#comment-825 I’d like to suggest, contrary to Darryl, that 1 Cor. 6 is normative for the Church. Of course the ideal is that fellow believers should be able to get along, due to gratitude for what Christ has done for them. But it is not always possible to “live peacably with all men.” The Church is better able than the state to deal with the intricacies of interpersonal conflict because of the priority of grace over law: mercy triumphs over judgment. The state is also supposed to be merciful in its administration of law, but it is restricted in this by law’s very nature as formal procedural principle. The Church is better equipped to handle things in a less formal way, giving priority to the human element.

]]> By: D Hart http://deregnochristi.org/2007/05/18/re-the-spirituality-of-the-church-and-1-cor-61-11/#comment-824 Sun, 20 May 2007 02:36:00 +0000 http://deregnochristi.org/2007/05/18/re-the-spirituality-of-the-church-and-1-cor-61-11/#comment-824 Bill, I don’t read 1 Cor. 6 as the norm for the church, as if session should act as a court of law for civil disputes between Christians. The point seems to be that Christians should love each other and not even go to court. But if they still can’t disagree, it’s disgraceful to go to civil court. And so in a pinch maybe the elders can resolve the matter.

Your point about Christian neighborhoods and villages is congenial to me at least. It comports with my anti-federalist and localist instincts.

]]>