|
The Western Spiritual Tradition:
Conflict
By Bruce Arnold, Delivered by Sally Franz,
December 17, 2006
At the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, New Bern, NC
In 1517, Martin Luther attacked the practice of selling indulgences in the Catholic Church. By paying money to the church, you or a loved one could be released from Purgatory and go straight to heaven. Luther argued that salvation could be achieved by faith alone. The resulting argument led to what we now call the Reformation, and the establishment of the various Protestant churches.
In 1702, a group of North Carolina Baptists led by Paul Palmer split from the rest of the Baptist Church to form the Free Will Baptists. The issue at stake might be summed up as, "once saved, always saved." The Free Will Baptists dissented from this more general view, believing that an individual could choose to turn his back on salvation.
In 1842, the Society of Friends split into the Gurneyite and Wilburite factions. The former favored biblical authority, the latter felt that all authority was derived from experience of the indwelling Holy Spirit.
In recent years, we have seen the Episcopal Church split over the issue of the ordination of women and gays.
In Alcoholics Anonymous, it is said that the only requirements to start a new meeting are a coffee pot and a grudge.
It seems that there is no end to the ways that we can find to disagree with one another.
Benjamin Franklin is credited with the saying that "In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes." Perhaps we could add conflict to the list.
In the year 325 A.D., the Emperor Constantine called together an ecumenical council of all the bishops in the Christian world. Several hundred actually showed up. It was held in the town of Nicaea, in what is now Turkey. There were many issues that they came to settle, but none was more important than the controversy surrounding what we now know as the Arian heresy. Arius was a priest who taught in the area around Alexandria, Egypt. He claimed that Jesus proceeded from God, and was therefore not equal with God. The majority view on this issue is called Trinitarianism, and holds that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are co-equal and co-eternal. The historical roots of Unitarianism are to be found in
Arianism.
Those who proclaimed the Trinity said that Jesus was of the same substance as God. In Greek, this doctrine is known as Homoousia (Ho-mo-oos-ee-ah.) Others, holding that Jesus was of similar substance rather than identical substance, were known as homoiousians (ho-mo-ee-oos-ee-ans.) The only difference between these two words is the I in the middle. In Greek, this letter is called "iota". So it is this very argument which gave rise to the saying that "there is not one iota of difference."
Although the trinitarians won out in the Nicaean council, this was not the end of the controversy. It's simply helped to establish that those who believed in the Trinity were orthodox, and those who did not, were heretical.
This is one way of ending conflict. You simply define your opponent out of existence. However, as the history of this controversy demonstrates, this does not work. The argument about the relationship between God and Jesus continues down to the present day.
Another way to end a conflict is to define the argument out of existence. For instance, the early Christians could have said that this was not an important issue. They could have said that it did not make one iota of difference. They could have noted that the similarities between the trinitarians and the Arians were far more extensive than the disagreements, and let it rest at that.
Conflict in and of itself is not an evil. While we should not look forward to it, or seek to engage in it, neither should we avoid it. Often a new understanding can emerge from a conflict when both points of view are taken seriously. It is all too easy for the participants in a controversy to want to win. They may want to banish their opponents, or at least render them ineffective. There is something about human nature that puts being right ahead of being loved. In our own conflicts, we might want to reverse this priority.
|
