Tricycle Christianity

Last night, as part of our winter Bible school, Ernest S. from Oklahoma, gave a memorable illustration about the essence of Christianity. A tricycle served as his teaching tool. He assured us early on that many church controversies could be eliminated if the principles he set out to illustrate could be understood. Furthermore, many restorationist movements err when they fail to take these principles into account. (Restorationists focus on a return to apostolic church life.)

He spoke from the text in John 14:6 where Jesus said "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

First he pointed out that a three-wheeled object like a tricycle is much more stable than a one or two-wheeled object like a unicycle or a bicycle.

With a small tricycle perched on a table on the platform, Ernest pointed to the drive wheel--the largest wheel--as the "way" wheel. He defined the "way" as living like Christ, or walking in the way of Christ. He read many Scriptures about "the way." With that as the first focus, the drive, of a Christian life, the two smaller wheels (truth and life)--or lesser emphases in the Christian life--provide balance.

Ernest went on to say that when people try to live by "truth" as the drive wheel, a rigid fundamentalism results, where proper creed and proclamations prevail, over and above living a Christ-like life. He identified his own background as being heavily influenced by this imbalance. (He grew up in a "Non-conference Conservative" church, for those to whom this term is meaningful.) He identified the Beachys as having been less influenced by the fundamentalist view.

When people emphasize the "life" of a Christian, they tend to look for emotion and excitement, perhaps neglecting in the process, Christ-likeness and adherence to Scripture. He noted that a heavy emphasis on gifts and manifestations of the Spirit, such as are present in groups known as Charismatics, fall into this category.

Restorationist groups always have both vision and reaction in their makeup. Here's where he didn't let the Beachys off the hook. He asked us if we were honest enough to admit that. He likened it to a child riding a tricycle headlong down the center aisle in church from front to back, all the while looking back over his shoulder to someone standing at the front of the church. Such is the nature of reaction--an almost certain veering off course--without eyes firmly fixed on the goal of our journey--Christ, Whom we must imitate.

The first Anabaptists were a restorationist group. As such, they also suffered from some reactionary imbalances. However, more than most of the others of their time, they understood the importance of walking in "the way." They rejected the creeds and forms of the established church, and formed a group of Christ-followers who didn't spell things out in writing in great detail. Neither did they form an elaborate set of rules for how to live as Christ did. They did not worship like present day Charismatics, but their worship contained elements of spontaneity that were missing in the Catholic church. The defining characteristic of their Christian life was that every day, they tried to follow Christ in every detail of their lives. The "way" was the drive wheel of their tricycle, and truth and life were the two supporting wheels.

Ernest asked whether the commandments of the apostles held equal authority with the example of the apostles. Many in the group shook their heads no. He agreed, reminding us that the early Christians, as all Christians must, lived out their Christian lives in a specific time and place, and they brought to the effort a specific set of traditions and cultural norms. In an insightful comment, Ernest noted that many church controversies have developed in the area of apostolic example--an area best regarded with an openness to various alternatives appropriate to the specific time and place in which we live.

In working through disagreements in church life, Ernest suggested that we ask two questions: 1) Is it important that we agree? (Are we striving about words to no profit? How will this contribute to our ultimate purpose?) 2) If we settle the controversy and lose our Christ-likeness, what have we gained? (Even failure to reach consensus is not ultimate failure if Christ-likeness is developed in the lives of those who engage in the struggle.)

Listening to Ernest speaking last night recalled for me many Anabaptist history class discussions. Knowing just a bit about Ernest's personal history gave some credibility to his analyses, especially as he views restorationist movements.

Many decades ago his grandparents, who were in the same Nisly family as many of us in Kansas are, left the Amish and moved to Iowa and then to Oregon. I don't know a lot of details about his personal life, except that he is no longer associated organizationally with the church group that originally ordained him. I know also that how he views our particular church group has changed dramatically. For the past eight years or so, at his request, our churches here have provided organizational help and regular preaching input for the fledgling congregation he is part of in Oklahoma. He expressed gratitude for that last night.

What I like best about teaching like Ernest gave us is that it helps us be thoughtful about our personal walk with Christ without becoming self-centered in the process. We give thought also to the basic essence of Christianity (living like Christ), and what He asks of us in this time in history, in this cultural context, with our particular background and set of cultural traditions. To be sure, that task is big enough to occupy our thinking and efforts for a long time. But last night we had a chance to point our tricycles in the right direction, and feel a new inner resolve to place our feet firmly on the pedals that power us along the way of Christ.