On Peace, Unity, and Purity (Or: Being PETER)

A few years ago my presbytery was embroiled in a particularly heated debate over issues related to the formation of what came to be known as the Confessing Church movement. At the time, “peace, unity, and purity” still referred primarily to an ordination vow and not to a theological task force. Some of my colleagues argued that unity is more critical than purity, while others argued the exact opposite point. Their positions looked a little bit like this: (1) “If we have to give a little on purity in order to be united, so be it,” and (2) “We need to establish clear boundaries that define who we are. If that means that we lose unity, so be it.” In other words, a lot of people thought that you can’t have both unity and purity. Pick which is more important go with that.

I disgreed with this zero-sum way of approaching the issue. And I continue to feel uncomfortable when this same dynamic plays out in other arenas. Neither fractured purity nor sham unity strike me as worthy goals for our church. In such situations, I am guided by the instruction I find in Ephesians 4 which points us in the right direction.

The chapter begins (verses 1-6) with a powerful but an almost monotonous description of our Christian unity. We are one in so many ways! Unity is obviously a vital component of our identity as the people of God. It is worth working and struggling for. At the same time, the chapter concludes (verses 17-32) with some of the strongest language in the New Testament that calls for believers to purity, both ethical and doctrinal. This chapter offers potential proof-texts for both unity advocates and purity promoters.

Instead of mining Ephesians 4 to find ammunition to support our preconceptions, we ought instead to attend carefully to how it draws together what we may be tempted to view as separate goals of unity and purity. For me, the admonition in verse 15 offers the key to the whole dilemma: “speaking the truth in love.” If we can figure out how to do that, we’ve solved the dilemma. Some of us are intent on speaking the truth (or our concept of the truth), but don’t put much effort into doing so in a loving way. Others of us are so concerned about being loving and respectful that we’ll accept everything that comes down the pike so that we don’t offend or exclude anyone. Neither of these approaches lives up to the challenge of “speaking the truth in love.”

If I’d ever form an advocacy group in our denomination, I’d have my eye on Ephesians 4:15 and call it “Presbyterians Expressing Truth and Encouraging Respect.” I don’t think I’ll ever do this, because of the rather vain acronym “PETER.” I’m convinced, however, that this is the goal which practically all of us aspire to. How can we respectfully express our understanding of the truth to one another in a way that encourages both unity and purity? This isn’t a trivial concern; it’s something we all vowed to do when we were ordained.

As a number of wise people have pointed out in the past, the choice between unity and purity is a false one. You can’t be united if you’re not pure, and you can’t be pure if you’re not united. Ephesians 4 concludes in verse 32 with a description of how being pure encourages unity: “Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.”

On Being a Church

The book of Acts suggests three models for what a church should look like, particularly when it comes to disagreements.

Acts 2:42-47 offers an ideal vision of the church. Immediately after Pentecost, as the church was just beginning, its members shared remarkable unity and harmony. As verse 44 puts is, “all the believers were together and had everything in common” (NIV). The description of the church fairly drips with the joy of shared life in God’s community. This is what we strive and hope for, but we only catch occasional glimpses of it in a messy world filled with imperfect people. If we think that anything short of this is a failure, we’re setting a standard that will surely disappoint. The euphoria at the beginning of a romantic relationship won’t continue uninterrupted through the course of a marriage. The joy that someone feels when they become a Christian doesn’t last; the mountaintop experiences are punctuated by valleys of struggle and growth. Life as a church isn’t always easy and joyful. While this description of church life is our goal, we need a model that helps us with the tough work.

Acts 15:36-41 describes a situation of difficulty and conflict. Paul and Barnabas disagreed over the mission for the church (sound familiar?), so they parted company. Silas went with Paul, and Mark joined Barnabas. We may want to use this as a Biblical model for disagreement in the church: walk away from each other. If we disassociate from other Christians with whom we disagree, maybe we can return to the utopia of Acts 2. When we have a “sharp disagreement” with each other, as Paul and Barnabas did, perhaps an amicable separation is God’s call for us. I’m not so sure. Paul still had Silas, and Barnabas still had Mark. As the old saying goes, if you put two Presbyterians in a room, you’re going to end up with three opinions. Because of our sinful human condition, it’s only a matter of time until Paul bickers with Silas, and Barnabas falls out with Mark. Now we have four groups. Surely it’s not God’s intention for us to separate every time we disagree, until we each have our own private little church. There has to be a way for us to face our disagreements without destroying our covenant relationships with each other. If God brought us together as a church, we need to figure out how to stay together.

Acts 15:1-21 suggests a third model for what a church can look like. The early Christians disagreed over the role of Gentiles in the church: did they need to become Jews first, or did Christ’s grace extend to all nations? The leaders of the church gathered at what is now called “the Council of Jerusalem” to deliberate on this issue (the first General Assembly!). Representatives from both sides stated their case, and the apostles and elders prayerfully sought God’s guidance. Finally James, as the “moderator” of the Jerusalem church, spoke for the body by giving a final decision. Some people agreed with it, and others didn’t. The issue didn’t go away: just read Galatians to see how strong the disagreement continued to be! Nonetheless, the church had made a decision, and it was time to move on.

Here’s the bottom line: joyful harmony is our goal, but we need to figure out what to do when we don’t have it. Parting company with each other, even on good terms, leads to disintegration. Prayerful and respectful deliberation and decision-making helps us move forward, even if it doesn’t make everyone happy.

Peter's Background

Peter de Vries grew up in Boswell, a coal mining community in western Pennsylvania, and in Covenant Presbyterian Church, a congregation of about 60 members. He earned a bachelor’s degree in history at Penn State before attending Princeton Theological Seminary, where he received his M.Div. in 1988. Peter served as the pastor for a yoked parish of two rural congregations in Kiskiminetas Presbytery for five years before moving to his present call. Since 1993 he has been the pastor of Old Union Presbyterian Church in Mars, a 200 member congregation of Beaver-Butler Presbytery, located just beyond the northern suburbs of Pittsburgh.

Peter earned a Ph.D. student in religious studies at the University of Pittsburgh, focusing on interpretive theory, philosophy of language, and how these fields can be used in New Testament studies. His dissertation used the hermeneutic theory of Paul Ricoeur to advance an understanding of Jesus’ apocalyptic discourse of Mark 13. Peter has made presentations at regional, national, and international academic conferences.

Peter’s relationship with Presbyterian partners in Ghana began in 1989, and in 1997 he and his family traveled to Ghana for the first time. His continuing visits to Ghana focus primarily on leadership training. Peter has been the convener of the Ghana Mission Network since its inception in 2002 until 2009, and he led a recent partnership meeting for US and Ghanaian Presbyterians.

Peter has been involved in youth ministry locally and at the presbytery, synod, and national levels. He has served at presbytery and synod camps and conferences, and in evangelism at the presbytery and synod level. He is served as the moderator of Beaver-Butler Presbytery and was a candidate for General Assembly moderator in 2008. Peter has taught at Chautauqua Institution, served as a Bible Hour speaker at New Wilmington Missionary Conference, and spoke at an interfaith town hall meeting sponsored by Pittsburgh’s Muslim community.

Peter is the son of Dutch immigrants and is the youngest of four children. Peter has been married since 1994 to his best friend Becky, a counselor and school psychologist. He has three stepchildren: Shari, Devin, and Trevor. Peter enjoys bicycling, motorcycling, downhill and cross-country skiing, kayaking, hiking, playing guitar, and throwing boomerangs.

On Mission

God touches a broken and needy world primarily through his body, the church. Because of his love for us, God calls us to participate in his care for the world. We are a church only when we reach to our community, nation, and world. We are faithful disciples only when we engage in acts of compassion, justice, and proclamation in Christ’s name. As we act for God, we discover that our mission transforms not only the world, but us. My relationship with our partners in Ghana, the mission trips I have led to other parts of our nation, and the service and volunteering opportunities that I lead for our church youth group have enriched my life and the life of my congregation as much as I hope that I have enriched theirs.

On the Bible

As Reformed Christians, we rely primarily upon Scripture as we seek to serve and glorify God. Unfortunately, however, we often use the Bible as a tool to justify our preconceived agendas, instead of humbly listening for God’s guidance. At times we are so intent on declaring the authority of Scripture that we neglect prayerful reflection and study of it. We settle for platitudes and simplistic concepts instead of opening ourselves to the ways that God uses the Bible to transform us. My doctoral work comes from my desire to explore the Bible more deeply, and to develop a greater understanding of how God’s message comes to us through it. I am constantly amazed at the ways in which Scripture fails to match our expectations for it. I eagerly open myself to the challenges which God continues to provide through his written word.

On Conflict

The PC(USA) is not in a crisis. Christianity has experienced discord and conflict from its very inception. While the intensity of our disagreements and the things we disagree about may distress us, God calls us to persevere in our struggle together to discern his way forward. His call for each of us in such situations is:

• to express our understanding of God’s will to one another,
• to listen with an open heart and an attitude of respect,
• to assume that we are all acting with integrity and a desire to honor God,
• to realize that disagreements over issues, even those very dear to us, do not destroy our common bond through Christ, and
• to submit to our common understanding of God’s will for us, even when it differs from our individual convictions.

In the personal, pastoral, and academic aspects of my life, I have been amazed at how God reconciled seemingly intractable situations. The Holy Spirit is at work in our church and will guide us through our struggles as we open ourselves to him.