[OBW]

Terry,

I understand your preference for meeting around no externally ordained creed, distinctives, etc. But when we say “according to the New Testament pattern,” are we saying that we meet, or are we saying that we meet somewhat the way the Local Churches did before the corruption surfaced and made it clearly unholy?

If you mean that we meet, then it is not hard to find people all over any city — small or large — who meet. You may argue that each grouping takes on some preference of doctrine or practice, but doesn’t the group that seeks to act like the first century Christians with small numbers have a preference relative to other groups, and relative to the century in which they live?

I am not saying that would be a bad thing for those who so desire. I am saying that it is merely one more “way to meet” with a less-defined but no less real doctrinal preference in a sea of other such groups. The unity is not in giving up your preference on what you will focus your practice and what doctrines you do not want to argue about (the reason for the separation is not to fight about doctrine, but to avoid the fight about doctrines), but it is found in the understanding that those who choose to meet differently and understand certain doctrines differently are still your Christian brothers and sisters with whom you can have fellowship and even join in communion at any assembly.

If we think that our way is better than others to the extent that we consider them poor Christians (or not at all) or if we think our position on certain doctrines makes us better than the others, then we have a problem. But I am willing to argue some point of doctrine with you, then when we have finished without either budging, take you to dinner and pay the tab, followed by going to meet at either place and partaking of the Lord’s table. (I may admit to having a problem with partaking in a RCC place, but that may be something I need to deal with as much as I think they need to deal with it. I’m not sure.)

The only reason I go through this discussion (actually repeated several times in different ways over the past years) is that I see in some people the sense that, although the LC as we knew it is no more, many still believe that the general way they met is somehow “God ordained” and would argue that as a point of contention. I believe that even having that thought undermines the very claim of what they think meeting their way would bring — unity. Unless all Christians everywhere agree at once, it can only bring division because it set itself up against all others.

Meet that way if you choose. Be clear that it is a preference. Do not hold it as a yardstick against your brothers and sisters. Be at peace with all men, especially those of the household of faith.

Last, for everyone reading, I am not really arguing wtih Terry. While I do not know exactly how he stands, I am not presuming that this is to somehow correct him, but to add an additional angle to the "ground of locality" discussion by springing from his words.