Deep Church II

One of Belcher's proposals for a way forward out of the impasse between "traditionalists" and "emerging church" is to restore the three great ecumenical creeds (Apostles', Nicene and Athanasian) to the center of what "orthodoxy" means and looks like. He does not intend these to be walls keeping people out, but rather doors and windows into full participation in the people of God. In the debate between "believing before belonging" (more of the traditionalist posture) and "belonging before believing" (emerging), Belcher isn't settling for either pole, but rather attempts to clarify what is to be believed in order to belong, without determining the order in which they are to happen. How do you see this proposal possibly being fruitful... or misguided?

Deep Church I

We begin our discussion of Jim Belcher's new book, "Deep Church." In the first part of his book, Belcher describes the current impasses or areas of significant disagreement between evangelical "traditionalists" and members of the "emerging" church movement. He also describes his personal quest to find a "third way" between these two perspectives, a way that maintains the strengths that each has to offer, while avoiding their inherent weaknesses.

So, what struck you as either insightful or off-base or otherwise worthy of discussion? It will help if you could be specific to Belcher's text--we're obviously hoping that you have read/are reading the actual book along with this discussion about it!

Uncomfortable Ideas

What's an idea that makes you uncomfortable? (We're trying to be serious here, OK?) We all tend to prefer the company and conversation of people and ideas that affirm or support what we already think and believe, but some of our best steps forward can come through interaction with ideas and perspectives that call some of our cherished convictions into question. So what's rockin' your boat and rattlin' your cage these days? Or what's an example from your past of how a significant forward step emerged out of a shaking or even shattering of what you thought you knew?

McKnight on the most "influential books"

Hi: I'm not posting this to necesarily to start a conversation -- I just thought you might find McKnight's discussion of the most influential books in his life interesting. After you watch this, we can return to the previous thread about influencing culture. McKnight is a voracious reader as well as prolific writer.



... By-the-way, McKnight started out teaching at a seminary, but decided to move to a liberal arts college in order to have greater influence on unchurched young people ... a good example of what we were talking about in the previous thread.

One-by-one or Aim for the Top?

I heard a presentation a while back during which the presenter called into question our usual approach of seeking to extend the kingdom one person at a time. His point was that, by failing to significantly engage with the "culture-formers" of our world, we always end up being "behind the cultural curve"--the culture's effectiveness at "making disciples" outstrips the church's more one-by-one approach.

OK, OK, nobody's saying it has to be either/or, and nobody's arguing that most of us will generally enjoy ready access to culture-makers. But from a strategic point of view, have we put ourselves at a significant disadvantage by failing to engage our culture at its formative levels (e.g., schools and universities, the media, the arts, government [uh oh]... and what else do you see as primary culture-makers/culture-shapers)? Are you aware of good examples of Christ's people entering into this kind of engagement? Do you think the presenter I referenced was missing The Point (and, if so, what might The Point be)?

What About Women?

No disrespect intended in the post title. How are you thinking about "gender roles," "women in leadership" and related issues? Are those who argue for equality/mutuality (e.g., evangelical "egalitarians") in roles simply aping, or conforming to, the culture? Does "in Christ there is neither... male nor female" nevertheless encompass role distinctions based, solely or primarily, on gender (more of the "complementarian" or "traditonalist" position)? Does any kind of "flexing" on gender roles--e.g., having women preach/teach (including preaching/teaching to men) represent a "slippery slope" that will ineluctably lead towards endorsing homosexual behavior or a denial of the uniqueness of Christ in salvation? Is this an area in which "the church" (however we understand it) is called to take an unpopular, counter-cultural stance (which would clearly be the case for those who argue for traditional gender roles)... or would we be shooting ourselves in the foot, from a missional perspective, by insisting on traditional gender role distinctions?

Labor day prayers

Lectionary Readings from the Anglican Book of Common Prayer

Ps 41, 52 * 44; 1 Kings 13:1-10; Philippians 1:1-11

Mark 15:40-47. ...waiting expectantly for the kingdom of God.

Commentary on Anglican lectionary readings

Daily Meditation from Henri Nouwen:

Living in the End-Time

We are living in the end-time! This does not mean that creation will soon come to its end, but it does mean that all the signs of the end of time that Jesus mentions are already with us: wars and revolutions, conflicts between nations and between kingdoms, earthquakes, plagues, famines, and persecutions (see Luke 21:9-12). Jesus describes the events of our world as announcements that this world is not our final dwelling place, but that the Son of Man will come to bring us our full freedom. "When these things begin to take place," Jesus says, "stand erect, hold your heads high, because your liberation is near at hand" (Luke 21:28). The terrible events surrounding us must be lived as ways to make us ready for our final liberation.

Finding Faith by Flory and Miller.

I took a break from doing heavy lifting with history books and read a 2008 book on dominant trends within current evangelicalism based on a study by two sociologists of religion, Richard Flory and Donald E. Miller. Their book is called Finding Faith: The Spiritual Quest of the Post-Boomer Generation. They are specifically interested in finding the religious or spiritual trends among the under 40 crowd. To do so, they spent two years interviewing 100 people and visiting a dozen significant congregations around the country.

They build their analysis around 4 types of trends or styles that they see among evangelicalism: what they call Innovators, Appropriators, Resisters, and Reclaimers. The innovators are represented by people like Brian McLaren and Leonard Sweet, and, according to the authors, prefer smaller congregations with a high level of engagement with the larger community and social issues. The Appropriators are the large Mall type mega churches that offer hundreds of programming choices to the religious consumer. The Resisters are those who are critical of postmodernism and resistant to any accommodation to current cultural changes and who keep a strong focus on rational faith and careful exegesis of the scriptures and ultimately desire to move young people back to a rational, text-based faith. Finally the Reclaimers are those evangelicals who are leaving evangelical churches in order to associate with strongly liturgical churches such as the Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic or Anglican. They are reclaiming the ancient traditions of worship of the early or Patristic church.

What do you think of these four types of response? Are there any responses that you might feel that they left out? Which response do you most identify with?

"Searching" and "Seeking"

Search engines, bots, apps, information... information overload. Is there an app for seeking God? We go a little nuts if we can't get google to display what we're really looking for... ever seeking but never coming to a knowledge of the truth. How do search technologies shape the way we think about, or don't think about, seeking God? How can digital technologies help us seek and find God, and how can they get in the way? With so many access points into our lives--cell phones, social networks, pings and pokes, and on and on--how do we create time and space for God to find us, and us to find him?

SIGNS OF CESSATION

New topic. This below is taken from Charles Simpson’s June 2009 letter. You can find it online at http://www.csmpublishing.com/pastoral.php.

SIGNS OF CESSATION

When the Holy Spirit begins to lift the intensity of revival, our own misunderstanding of what He is doing can lead to burn out, disappointment, and burned over fields. How do we know that the Lord is saying the revival season is over? Here are some signs:

-Real Revival usually comes suddenly in power and spontaneity. When that electric sense of spontaneity ceases or subsides and attendance at special gatherings declines, it’s over.

-Real Revival brings dramatic testimonies. When testimonies are more forced and less significant, it’s over.

-When leaders have to work harder to get a response, it’s over.

-When leaders try to export or duplicate the experience, it is probably over.

-When leaders fail to exercise discernment and allow obvious moral problems, excessive displays, or unbiblical error, it will soon be over.