On Christian Unity

**WARNING** CHRISTIANESE SPOKEN HERE.

My brother and I got into this fascinating discussion about the church. Or maybe I should say, The Church. I have always thought that all the different denominations and varieties we have reflect our personal uniqueness and individuality in the sense that, there is always a church for everyone at every moment in their lives. I was raised American Baptist, but during college spent whatever Sundays I actually attended church at an Episcopalian service because I loved the reminder of the agelessness of my faith. I needed that at that point in my life. Over the years I have attended several different denominations, but I never really left my American Baptist roots. My brother didn't disagree, but his comment was, "but what constitutes the church? Is it a universal thing where all congregations fit in? Or is it a particular congregation or building?" Seems like an easy question - but he went on...

What's the marker of being a Christian? he asked.

Love. (At least in theory.)

What does institutionalized love look like? (what does it mean for an institution - like the Church - to love?)

Unity. (Again, at least in theory.)

So why is it that we have two "sacraments" we all agree on as Christians, but we can't even practice them together? Baptism is more universal - if you are baptized as an infant or adult it will work for most denominations. But still, some Baptists will not accept an infant baptism, and the Orthodox church does not accept baptism from any other denomination. But that's pretty good... a gap, but not a huge gap in how we practice that one.

Then there's the Lord's Supper / Communion / Eucharist. The Lord's Supper is communal - it's about sharing "a meal" with the community to commemorate the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. But the thing that is supposed to be about community has become horribly divisive in the Christian tradition. When he asked his Catholic students if they would participate in a Lord's Supper service in a baptist church (where the bread and "wine" are said to be symbolic of Jesus' body and blood, rather than actually becoming Jesus' body and blood) - his students unanimously said NO. And there are some baptists who would not participate in a Catholic Eucharist because of the differences in doctrine as well. Communion has become one of the most divisive acts in Christian tradition.

To my brother and I, that was rather inconceivable because he and I were brought up to be accepting of differences and, if put into a situation where we disagreed with something like that, to find the beauty in it and celebrate it in our own hearts the way we understand it. (Side note: this is probably why I can walk into a Mosque and walk through their worship service without taking issue - I'm glad to spend the time on my knees, praying to God - following the Muslim practices but mentally adjusting it to fit my own understanding of God and faith.)

So why is it that doctrine is so divisive, even in regard to the one act that is supposed to be most unifying and communal? I don't have any answers to that - just asking the question. If we are, indeed, to be One Church - the One Body of Jesus Christ - how can we be one without neglecting issues of doctrine and tradition, but using those to strengthen our unity rather than destroy it?