This post on the next chapter of Franke’s book will not be all that long. He says a number of true (and obvious) things about the diversity that has existed in the Christian church over the centuries, and which will no doubt continue to exist. He then points to the indigenization principle (God takes us where we are) and the transformation principle (God does not leave us where we are). Amen to both.
The category mistake that is going to undercut Franke’s thesis on the inherent “plurality of truth” comes out right near the end of this chapter. “Plurality, not uniformity, characterizes the story of Christianity” (p. 28). This is quite true, but uniformity and unity are two completely different things. Franke appears to be rejecting the former (as should we all, if we are Trinitarian) while thinking that he is pointing out a problem with the latter.
But to take Paul’s example of the unity of the body, consider this: “For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ” (1 Cor. 12:12). But in the discussion that follows, how much uniformity do we find? None, but the whole argument is an argument for unity, not uniformity. What does a liver have in common with a wrist, an ear with an eye, or feet with the tongue? Paul takes this astonishing diversity as a knock-down argument for unity, for singularity, for the one body, which is the body of Christ. Franke looks as the astonishing diversity of Christian history, thinks the whole thing is unraveling in his hands, and so he decides to make that unraveling into a virtue.