We heard David Bercot’s take on how sects arise—including the way things fell down at the Council of Nicea over important minutiae. Gauging from the sounds of the crowd and the questions from Saturday’s session, The Spirit of Sectarianism was the most stimulating session for the majority of the participants.

David Bercot pressed his opinion on our inherited Church of Christ legalism when he asked if we would rather accept into church fellowship the ‘man of love’ Francis of Assisi or the loveless deadpan doctrinarian man who was properly baptized. I thought seriously about this one because of my knowledge of Francis and a few Mr. Deadpans. So let’s jump aboard into Bercot’s argument.

I must confess bias because my middle name comes from Francis (1182-1226), the friar who became the patron saint of animals and all of Italy. At least one of my great aunts belonged to the Franciscan Order of Sisters. I know that Francis originated the idea of reenacting the Christmas manger, emphasized peace and started the now famous Franciscan Order. But then the story gets X-file-ish. Francis was allegedly the first medieval believer to receive the stigmata (bodily marks matching Christ’s wounds) which quickly ushered in many miraculous stigmata among Catholics. Moreover, soon after the death and burial of his friend and fellow Franciscan brother Pietro Cattini many miracles suddenly occurred. Then the crowds came from everywhere and disturbed the Order’s peace. Frustrated, Francis prayed, telling Pietro Cattini to obey him like he used to and stop the miracles. Bummer!

Then there is the story of the friar’s conversations with the animals, or fish that would stay near his boat until he gave them permission to leave. But it was the Wolf of Gubbio story that still draws people to Francis. A wolf terrorized the town of Gubbio by killing its people and animals to the point that townsfolk were even afraid to venture outside. So Francis confronted the beast all by himself, staring him down. He daringly gave the Sign of the Cross (I am visualizing the crucifix in the later Dracula story) towards the wolf and began preaching, “Come to me, Brother Wolf. In the name of Christ, I order you not to hurt anyone.” Then amazingly, the story goes, the wolf lay down by Francis's feet where soon Francis forgave his sins. To indicate compliance the wolf nodded and shook his paw with the hand of Francis. Just after the pact was made Francis preached a revival sermon. Thereafter, the wolf was a welcome visitor of Gubbio until he died of old age.

Now the original question begs an answer so here it is. I really, really don’t know. Would you rather have a Dr. Doolittle, miracle stopping party pooper who brings werewolves to church or a legalistic deadpan church member? It’s a difficult decision. But I don’t think I really have to make those kinds of impossible choices. Either/or scenarios is like the false choice between two evils. We just have to look for the third option. I say bring church discipline on Mr. Deadpan and invite Dr. Francis Doolittle to study where pets were not allowed.

All jesting aside, I think Bercot’s intended points were relevant, but he appeared to sentimentalize Francis placing attendees in the position of role-playing God. There are too many matters in which I don’t have the answer and I am fine with that. I have long believed that God still places the knowledge of many what/if scenarios beyond my reach, high up on the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. I have various thoughts of his doctrinal forgiveness and prerogative of divine concession but there is no reason to stop persuading someone on any of the issues central to Apostolic Christianity while their heart is still ticking.

I was not in attendance on the final day to hear Mr. Bercot’s presentation The Church and the World but the chatter afterwards indicate that it too was lively.

Our particular views of politics, worship, and the roles of elders and evangelists vary within our fellowship. Fewer of us identify with the matters raised on women’s attire and hair length or serving in the government.^₁

On the issue of pacifism and non-resistance there is a growing number who are openly thinking through it. I am an ethical Pacifist due to teachings within the Sermon of the Mount and Christ’s example. This means achieving peace against my adversaries through non-resistance, scorning the evil and trusting in God alone for deliverance. However, I do not hold the view that it always wrong when a life ends in the rescue of innocent victims of evil and tyranny and I would appeal to the Bible. Amongst my fellow teachers there are clear differences on this issue and they too will appeal to the Bible. So what do we do?

We mustn’t follow the conventional ignorance which is a path of division, especially over issues that are of great importance but not central tenants of the faith. And we should not use the pulpit, writings, or academia to peddle our views in a polarizing manner and castigate those who see differently. Our International gathering of churches involves many of those who have been reared in American nationalism on the right and European Postmodernism on the left. The starting points from before our Christian journey shape all of us and it takes some of us longer to see ourselves—equally true of teachers.

Our differences can lead to productive conversation which is needed because the world is constantly entering the church through our surroundings and even the beloved newly baptized member. We are always aware of how being uninformed or wrongly informed can jade us. Our entertainment and upbringing can neuter our convictions as we become too familiar with everyday lies and error.

Of course, we can always see the speck in someone else’s eye. I have observed in my travels that many dangerously over-correct someone else’s speck with a new log. If we are not careful our differences will become fodder for fruitless and bitter infighting. Then we may loose our saltiness. Thankfully I didn’t witness any such incursions in Atlanta and the seminar "The Church and the World" was very stimulating.

A final comment about filtering the experts we follow on the way to becoming “the one true pure mega awesome church of all grace the way it used to be:” we should remember what the apostle Paul wrote about following men (1 Corinthians 1-3). Let’s use Tertullian as an example. He held some of the most dramatic views relating to world and is the author of the famous phrase “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?” As an adamant anti-worldliness believer he began as a participant in catholic Christianity but later became part of the extreme Montanist sect. Which Tertullian do we follow? Justin Martyr, the second-century Christian Philosopher would have disagreed with significant aspects of Tertullian’s premise. Do we follow Justin? Are we Tertullianites? Justinians?

And Mr. Bercot has changed some views, as we all do. For instance he has been sometimes cited for beliefs that he no longer holds (the traditional view of Apostolic Succession).² On occasion a Christian will cling to someone like Tertullian or Bercot to get their church “to be the way it used to be”. As we have seen in our history, this is problematic. To use men to position ourselves in this way is just a clever and sectarian way of denouncing sectarianism. While men are capable of raising great questions, our aim must be to properly derive the answers that withstand the scrutiny of God’s word.

After questions are raised we must determine to land on sound answers rather than lingering in indifference. I would call all teachers and challenge every reader who is stimulated to reconsider their previously held views (because of reading patristic literature) to recognize that we have also been deeply affected by postmodern deconstructionism. This cultural mood makes it easy blow some belief or practice away by chiseling at it until there is nothing left. On the other hand, it takes courage in these times to stand down the pipers of disbelief and actually construct something such as truly biblical discipling models, fresh approaches for giving, world missions or planning for the orphanages. And let us construct biblically sound approaches for such things as a study series, women’s ministry and teamwork among our church officers.

In conclusion, if you are mature, discerning and are guided by clear principles then you will probably enjoy the material generated in Georgia, feasting on the meat and throwing away the bones. If you find yourself worked up and unable to process many opinions then give it a pass for the time being.