Does your experience of covenant within the church reflect a conditional works oriented schema as grounds of acceptance or "justification"?? The following are a few characteristics that are produced from a church where such an erroneous emphasis on covenant is espoused.
If what you do or what you commit yourself to do is done as a means to be accepted by a person or persons within the church, particularly leadership, this is probably true. Even the bombastic Peter succumbed to this pitfall while in Galatia. While he was eating with the Gentiles certain Jewish men from James approached and Peter subsequently withdrew and separated himself...."fearing the circumcision party" (Gal. 2:11-14) This conveyed an acceptance and justification based upon something other than the gospel. Paul retorted, "If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile, and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?" Peter comported himself in a certain way that sinfully discriminated as he complied to a standard of acceptance contrary to the gospel. This is indicative of covenantal nominalism.
If what you do and say is governed by the interest of obtaining validation from a minister, this is probably true. This is a characteristic of covenantal nominalism. Instead, Paul admonishes even slaves to conduct themselves in a certain way "not by way of eye-service, as people pleasers....Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men" (Col.3:22,23)
If when your interests and pursuits don't strictly conform to what a respective group within the church propagates, this is probably true. This was a crux of the church at Rome. There was division within the church over certain ascetics and ethnic preferences. One strata supposed it good to eat anything while another didn't, one strata esteemed one day as better than another while another esteems all days alike (Romans 14) These factions were "covenanting" with one another based upon something other than Jesus Christ. This too is an expression of covenantal nominalism.
If what Paul describes as "man pleasing" (I Thess. 2:4) is the prevalent atmosphere and chief end within any given church......this is invariably true. This praxis permeated the church at Corinth. As false apostles entered into the fray the credulous Corinthians were captivated by their bravado, presentation and intrigue so much so that they were being taken hostage by their wiles to the extent that they "willfully subjected" themselves to their abuse.
As Paul describes this, "For you gladly bear with fools....you bear it if someone makes slaves of you, or devours you, or takes advantage of you, of puts on airs, or strikes you in the face." (I Cor.11:20). The Corinthians were rejecting Paul because of his inability to be loquacious and bold. They were determining who was acceptable or justifiable based upon superficial preference.(cf. I Cor. 1:10-17) As a result, they became subject to the malevolence of their personified preference. This is another outworking of covenantal nominalism.
What is covenantal nominalism? It is a paradigmatic schema, that evolved from Pelagianism, which postulates that individuals must meet a precondition (other than Christ) to be accepted or justified. The above indicators are merely bi-products of this soteriology (doctrine of salvation).
This framework that produces the aforementioned mood and practical effects emerged around the 14th and 15th centuries. It was propounded and popularized by the via moderna. Advocates of the via moderna, such as William of Ockham and Gabriel Biel, borrowed an analogy from the secular dynamics of economic and political covenants to disguise their Pelagianism from their critics. In so doing they appropriated the schemes of secular covenants into their religious rule(ethos) and practice(praxis).
The few characteristics I listed above are expressions of a church culture that transposes the New Covenant in Christ Jesus with a secular variety of covenant that systemically redefines grounds of justification in a more or less anthropocentric manner. Ideas have practical consequences.
Credo ut intelligam
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
