church in the present tense 4/4

Scot McKnight, Peter Rollins, Kevin J. Corcoran, Jason Clark.Church in the Present Tense: A Candid Look at What's Emerging. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2011.

This review is divided into four parts, one for each major section of the book. Here we discuss Part Three: Bible and Doctrine.

The final two chapters of the book are authored by our friend over at The Jesus Creed, Scot McKnight.

Chapter Seven is entitled, "Scripture in the Emerging Movement." It begins with a bit of autobiographical background to explain McKnight's entrance into the emerging church discussion. As his blog discussions and his placement in this book demonstrate, he has become one of the more significant voices in the present discussion. (I think this is the case because he is willing to both commend and critique other voices in the movement, based not on sentiment or desire but on truth.) Regarding the questions surrounding emergent: "What attracted me? The willingness to question things, even sacred things. The desire to get Christianity back on track with Jesus's vision for the kingdom" (106).

The remainder of Chapter Seven is thus designed as a miniature introduction to the identifiable methodologies of approaching and applying Scripture from emergent groups. To accomplish this he leans heavily on his larger (and outstanding) book, The Blue Parakeet (2008). Those who are unfamiliar with the book will find the chapter to be a good introduction to the larger discussion. Those who have read the book will most likely shift into a skimming mode through a lot of the chapter.

Following the brief discussion on how the Bible is read (and noting that there does not exist a single type of reading among the emergent groups (111)), McKnight does draw some fresh conclusions and even issues some warnings to the new movements within the church. One such is quite appropriate for Christians of any stripe: ". . . commitment to the linguistic turn and its profound impact on hermeneutics and Bible reading dare not lead to arrogance. It leads one to drink form a well that cannot be drained, to an ocean that is too vast for words, and to a God who is so distant and holy and unapproachable that reverence is the only proper entailment of an emerging understanding of Scripture" (114).

Yet, in support of the movement which introduces diversity into hermeneutic he writes, "No single story, not even Jesus's, can tell the whole story. We need them all" (117). It is imperative to recapture the context of Scripture, with all of its twists and turns, and apply it to ourselves in the same way it was intended. This is a point which is built upon in the final chapter as well.

Chapter Eight is simply titled, "Atonement and Gospel," and is one of the best offerings in the entire book. Mostly I say this because it seeks to read Scripture in context as a means of cutting through layers of theological discussion that are more grounded in philosophical-theological thought than in the biblical text. There is a good amount of effort in the front half of the chapter devoted to understanding the concept of gospel in contemporary usage. Biblical studies have shown how this term is quite different in first century contexts than in contemporary ones, and McKnight applies the discussion well to the state of the church.

This discussion leads McKnight to examine Acts, for he believes that ". . . none of these atonement theories is at work in any central manner in the gospel preaching of the book of Acts. Something else is at work" (131). Herein lies the other piece of high value to this chapter - its survey of the first century church's message as demonstrated in Acts. This is driven by a response to the notion that, "Atonement theories are driving the meaning of gospel" (129).

Eight points are given to draw out the emphases of gospel preaching in the book of Acts, guiding the reader towards the notion of story as gospel. Simply stated, the early church told the story of Israel and the story of Jesus as a way of explaining the impact of messianic death, resurrection and exaltation. That story was not weighed by theory, but was told as a new reality which has broken into the world. McKnight suggests we return to that as a starting point in the church's (both emerging and otherwise) proclamation (cf. 138).

Having spent much time and energy in exploring the New Testament texts and contexts, I must say that I strongly agree with McKnight's analysis here. This chapter goes further in presenting that material in a manner relevant to today's church.

when it's time to go

Here we go with one of those art imitating life which is imitating art situations. And since it revolves around David Crowder Band, it is quite appropriate to have the mixing of the two. In a press release issued Saturday, the band announced that its sixth album (along with the upcoming fall tour) would be its last.

There is a perception in our culture that success is built into doing the same thing forever . . . or, for as long as is physically possible. This seems to be true in popular music, since the coveted longevity and unending 'relevance' is a sought after prize. And there is a certain truth to the quality of a band which has been able to sell music over the course of many years (for some, decades). The Christian music scene has often followed suit on this, assuming that if it is 'for the ministry' then it must continue on until Jesus comes back.

I'm not going to list any specifics on this, for that would be a matter of taste and distracting to my main point. But I think we can identify some Christian musicians who have continued making albums which were not actually any good, mostly from their commitment to their 'ministry' (and the fear of losing their place at the CCM table). Of course, these albums have been purchased in large number, but I often wonder if it is because of the Christian sub-genre or if it is legitimately solid music. I suppose it becomes a case-by-case basis. (Let me note that I do not think all Christian music is bad . . . I simply refuse to assume that all Christian music is good because of its adjectival label.)

What I appreciate about David Crowder Band's exit is that it happens on the time of their calling, not on the failure to sell recordings or pack out arenas. I would almost say it is on their time, but their point is to say that it is on God's time that they depart. Their statement cites new horizons of personal growth and exploration, a change of scenery in the past ten years, and new families which have come into their midst. In other words, there is life to be lived which is more abundant than this band. Sadly, most believers won't understand this decision.

Based on a few statements which I have caught over the past couple of years of following DCB, I have figured that they were intentionally on a journey that had a set completion to it. So I was not surprised by the news. However, it is still a bit sad for their voice to become still for a season.

There is wisdom and maturity in our ability to see the bigger picture in this life. So often we get caught up in the shortsightedness that we forget about the eternal. Here is a great reminder that the abundance of the life of Jesus is not something reserved for a sweet by-and-by. Rather, it is something which surrounds us every minute . . . if we allow ourselves to have eyes to see.

for those watching for Saturday's rapture . . .

. . . see you on Sunday!

(pic HT:McK)

grounded . . . or amish

My parents took me to Amish country, which to a kid, to see a bunch of people that have no cars, no TV, no phone, you go, "So what? Neither do I." Who wants to see a whole community that's been grounded? That's the way they should punish the kids after they've seen Amish country. "All right son, get up to your room. That's it, I've had it, you are Amish young man. For the rest of this weekend. Did you hear me? Amish! And don't come down till you've made some noodles and raised a barn."

-Jerry Seinfeld

church in the present tense 3/4

Scot McKnight, Peter Rollins, Kevin J. Corcoran, Jason Clark.Church in the Present Tense: A Candid Look at What's Emerging. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2011.

This review is divided into four parts, one for each major section of the book. Here we discuss Part Three: Worship.

Jason Clark once again provides a chapter, this time on "The Renewal of Liturgy in the Emerging Church." Chapter Five comes as a critique of current evangelicalism and the place that liturgy has within our modern worship. There is much to be said regarding the state of worship today, with a great amount of shallowing in individual faith because of a collapse of corporate tradition.

Clark writes, "Without a recovery and understanding of liturgy we are in danger of a collapse of ecclesiology and church into solipsistic worship aesthetics and private spaces" (75). Perhaps you are intimidated by that sentence. Let me paraphrase: We as churchgoers either enter into the larger narrative of our faith or we turn this into an elaborate enterprise of worshipping our own desires. Clark continues later, "We are whatever we want to be. We make ourselves in an image of our own manufacture. Often the selves we create are shallow and superficial, as they are based on issues of taste, personal preference, or whatever makes us happy" (80).

This is the sad and stark reality that our worship resembles, and I think that Jason Clark has made observations which are quite accurate. But his essay is not intended to simply decry the failures of the current practices of the church. Instead, his critique is intended to move forward to a more comprehensive and complete form of worship. He states, "Liturgy and ritual open up the possibility of reconnecting beliefs to their origins and to the people who held and practiced them generations ago. They connect us to the past, to the story, and shape us for life together in an alien world" . . . "We live in a world that does not know what to do with the ordinary"(81).

Following this discussion Clark introduces Flow: A Short-Term Catechism which came out of his own emergent church community. The notion is compared to a short-term missions experience, but through which the experience is replicated to one's own life and work on a daily basis. It is a forty day commitment to take one's faith into a secular world. It is built on three key elements: doing, knowing, being. It is worth taking a closer look, for certain, and contains the seeds of missional living for all believers.

Chapter Six is written by Peter Rollins, "Transformance Art: Reconfiguring the Social Self." Admittedly, there were some philosophical comments early on in this chapter that were a small challenge to distill . . . (especially when one begins to quote the writings of Karl Marx). However, I think that Rollins is on an interesting path with the early comment, "The ironic stance can be described as a way of distancing oneself from a certain social activity while simultaneously engaging in it" (90). Further, he says it this way, "The ironic stance can be maintained through engaging in what we may call perverse transgression. A perverse transgression is any act that appears to undermine a particular system but that actually affirms the very system it purports to attack" (92).

Rollins' point here is that Christian belief is often contradictory in what testimony comes from our mouths in comparison to what testimony flows from our lives. And the emerging generations of believers are unwilling to perpetuate such a system. It is simply unacceptable that we should talk about injustice and then participate in activities which make injustice more prevalent in the world. To this, Rollins asks, "To what extent can our prayer meetings and weekly commitment to the poor actually be the very activities that enable us to engage in careers that help to perpetuate what we are praying against?" (94).

Is it more important to defend our own culture and socio-traditions or follow the radical demands of the kingdom of God? If it is the latter, then the former must be removed . . . a complete transformation of the self over a 'better version' of the self. In one of the most quotable passages in the book thus far, "Christianity promises not intellectual satisfaction but rather substantive transformation, that is, a qualitative change in our being that reconfigures our way of being in the world" (97).

Although I don't readily understand or jump on board with the notions of what Rollins calls Transformance Art, I think that I ultimately grab hold of his underlying notion. Where I agree is that the individual (and community) who is transformed by the Spirit of God ought to also identify a renewal of the world around them, at least the potential renewal of it through the ongoing work of the Spirit from within. It is heaven that has come into the person and now seeks to move outward in a transformation of all creation.

The section on Worship should not be taken lightly, for it is a dimension of our lives that we worship. Whether it is a healthy worship of our Creator or a destructive worship of ourselves and our stuff, we must examine the context within which our devotion occurs.

heaven's becoming a popular place . . . (sort of)

Not to be outdone by the attention which has been given to Rob Bell, popular physicist Stephen Hawking has made his own radical statement regarding the abode of God - it doesn't exist. In a story which broke this week Hawking declared that any belief in an afterlife is nothing more than a "fairy story" for people who are afraid of death.

I wholeheartedly agree with Roger Olson's comment on this: ". . . how does being a physicist make Hawking an expert on metaphysical questions?" Indeed, it appears that Hawking is as misguided on the context of heaven as many other folks, including (sadly) a great number of Christians. For, heaven is not some place where one might find God's house - even though many metaphors use this imagery to help us explain that which goes beyond our ability to explain - it is, rather, a completely other dimension of reality/existence. Heaven is the experienced presence of God, which means that it has the potential to be anywhere and everywhere at any given time. It is the connection to his omnipresence.

Culturally speaking, we have heaven on the brain these days. Rob Bell has made a bunch of noise regarding heaven and hell, and we are also being assured by some kid that heaven is for real.

But I'm curious - will Hawking's comments create anything close to the firestorm which Rob Bell's (mostly unread) comments made? Probably not. I suppose that this is because the Christian community will write Hawking off, even though the world (who hasn't heard of Rob Bell) will take him seriously. This is the fruit of internal wars, and evangelicalism's commitment to treat our non-believing-neighbors better than we treat our believing-selves.

But, hey, y'know . . . so long as we got it right.

Right?

the idolatry of church

This past Sunday I spoke on Luke 10:38-42, the story of Jesus, Martha and Mary. It is simply an object lesson on the priority of Jesus, especially in a world full of tasks, objectives and distractions. The story is a prime example of the complex simplicity of Jesus - here is a lesson that can be fully understood on an initial reading of the text, yet remain eternally challenging and applicable.

Although my sermon was focussed in its own direction, this scene continues to gnaw at my perceptions of church.

Jesus always makes it clear that he is to be the one priority in the life of the believer, and this scene highlights such a demand. I wonder, when we say that Jesus is our one thing do we really understand the implications . . . and are we truly willing to embark on such a journey? The issue for Martha is that she is consumed with the activity which is around Jesus. Martha obviously believes that her activity is as important as Mary's, perhaps more so. Jesus sees it otherwise.

What is profoundly applicable in this passage is the extent to which we also believe that our Christianized activities are on the same plane as entering into the presence of Christ. We see this when our church communities become consumed with their own rituals and behaviors, or when the shouting over ministries and structures becomes more vital than hearing the still, small voice of the Spirit, or when we make any attempt to create a subculture that will shield the community of faith from the world around.

The apostle Paul said that Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her (Ephesians 5:5). Two points lie in the background of his statement: 1) We are the church that Christ loved, 2) The church has already had someone give themselves up for her. Our task then is not to give ourselves up for the church, for that would be self-love at Christ's expense. We are called to love Christ with everything - the reason why Paul crosses the metaphors of husband-and-wife with Christ-and-church - and give ourselves up for him.

Perhaps our role with church has become skewed in that we believe that our work for the community is equal with our love for Christ. Yes, Jesus did tell Peter that love for him was to be fleshed out in feeding his lambs (John 21). My contention is not that the two do not intersect, but that there is nothing in the world - no matter how small or great - which can be equated with the priority of Christ. We are called specifically to care for the church, but to serve Christ.

It must also be said that Jesus told us simply to Love God and Love Others (as ourselves). This has become known as The Jesus Creed, and I have said it daily for the few years I have become familiar with it. I am not making an attempt to split the command which Jesus gives, for a simple reading of this passage does seem to equate love for God with love of others. My position here is that there is a certain nuance in how that love is shown, that it becomes a love for others on behalf of Christ and not on behalf of ourselves, our tradition, or our churches.

The passage with Jesus, Martha and Mary seems to be a scene which is based on Deuteronomy 8:3, ". . . man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD." And here is Jesus, the Bread of Life and Word Incarnate, who offers himself to us and waits to discover whether or not we will be consumed with the physical bread of daily sustenance or the the eternal significance of his presence.

has evangelicalism turned gnostic?

My friend, Andrew Perriman, introduced a rather interesting discussion on his blog, p.ost earlier today: that modern evangelicalism has some points of comparison with second century Gnosticism over and above first century Christianity.

Although the comparisons are not exact, Andrew does make some astute observations on the current status of evangelicalism. There is a lack of historic understanding of the context of the New Testament, given way to some sort of redeemer-myth that could very well exist without the details of history. This is quite similar to the gnostic approach.

This line of thought also gives way to the escapist notion of Gnosticism, which is ever-present in modern rapture theology - a theology which is not found in Scripture, nor understood in the Jewish-Christian worldview of the first century. These points are often found in modern preaching, reinforcing viewpoints that resemble gnostic thought over early Christian theology.

It is an interesting discussion. Whether or not it is a modern Gnosticism, it certainly reveals the disconnect of modern and ancient Christian thought.

church in the present tense 2/4

Scot McKnight, Peter Rollins, Kevin J. Corcoran, Jason Clark.Church in the Present Tense: A Candid Look at What's Emerging. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2011.

This review is divided into four parts, one for each major section of the book. Here we discuss Part Two: Theology.

Chapter Three is "Consumer Liturgies and Their Corrosive Effects on Christian Identity" by Jason Clark. It is an outstanding essay on the current status of the church and the responses being given by the emergent community. Identifying cultural shifts which no longer have Christianity at the center of the community he explains that his own emergent experience was around a new set of questions, "Our question became not, how do we do church better so that people do not leave? but, how do we recover church for our context?" (39).

Cutting to the heart of the matter, and indeed many frustrations shared by those currently immersed in the church traditions, Clark writes, "Indeed, church has become nothing more than a meaningless expression of private religious association or a private club. But what if church were not just one choice among many but an ultimate and final choice?" (43). Clark's is a summons to move beyond consumerism in the life of the church in an effort to discover the life-changing renewal which is found in conformity with Christ.

Along this line of thinking Clark also ponders what a church that is more conformed to Christ would begin to be: "What if there is a 'givenness' to ecclesiology and church, a givenness in which we find our identity in contrast to the endless self-creation of identity of the modern consumer agent?" (45). These are lofty ideals indeed, but ones that seem to be embedded in the hearts of emergent Christians. Yet before the reader can fall into an ethereal conceptualization of the *perfect church* the author gives this important perspective, "I just want to be part of a 'real church,' we might cry out of exasperation. Perhaps we have been part of real churches already but have simply failed to notice" (48).

Having greatly appreciated the words in this essay, especially with the doses of imperfect realities throughout, I think Clark has contributed well to the conversation. I might echo Roger Olson's critique that perhaps some more concrete answers could have been included. This is but a minor quibble, though.

Chapter Four is "Thy Kingdom Come (on Earth): An Emerging Eschatology" by Kevin Corcoran. At the beginning of his thought he identifies this trend: "Emerging folks are, it seems, an eschatological lot, people who seek to make God's future a present reality, as best they can" (59). This, however, is not the eschatology of rapture and pre-post-a-Left Behind-millenialism that has been a part of the previous generation of the church. Rather, this is a future-made-present understanding of the kingdom of God, being the impetus of missional work.

This sort of approach makes it rather obvious why Tom Wright has become the unofficial patron saint of emergent Christianity. Corcoran writes, "Heaven is here, now, embodied in earth and mud. Granted, this kingdom has not yet been consummated or fully actualized. Still, it is here and it is now. It is a kingdom come and still coming" (65). This type of reality - one that makes the Lordship of Christ and the experience of his people presently meaningful - has given a renewed vigor to the emerging generation of Christians, as well as a breath of fresh air into our congregations.

slow dancing in a burning room

Yesterday I stood in the front of a room full of people, most notably a seven-year-old boy, to preach a funeral for a young woman who had taken her own life. The boy was notable because it was his mom.

A few weeks ago my wife and I hugged one of our college classmates, whose seven-year-old girl was killed because of a gun which went off by accident in their home.

On a weekly basis we have people who call or come into the church because they need food or heat or help. We know that some of them are trying to take us for a ride, but many of them are not.

Not long ago I sat in our preschool office and spoke with a nearly drunk father about how he needed to be doing a better job at single-parenting his only daughter. He wanted to get it, but I'm not certain he could have reached a sobering moment.

It doesn't take too much to realize that families in our culture are hurting and broken. Dr. Dobson was absolutely right, the fracture of the family has intertwined with the breakdown of our society. Now a new generation is taking up the sinful cycle.

These are the realities which encompass the church in its mission. Many of you could offer stories of greater difficulty and more intense need. (In fact, I withhold some that could better make my point because of their sensitive nature.) But this is what we are up against, all the while announcing to ourselves that the gospel was meant for people such as these.

And as it has been said before . . . We are 'doing church' better than ever, but watching the increasing ineffectiveness of our message. What is happening?

From my point-of-view it is a combination of factors, with the common denominators being the church's inherent loss of the kingdom. Let's face it, much of what American evangelicalism currently looks like a have-it-your-way, self-at-center, preference-oriented spiritualized experience. And it's failing to move the gospel outward (euangell-ize).

In the past four months my church experience has included those serious situations that I have described above. However, I have also been working through other things around here that make one feel almost bipolar. For instance, a few weeks ago there was a letter that asked the board to fire me because I wasn't friendly enough to someone who walks out of church, withholds tithes, and openly boasts about both. They don't participate because they don't like me. Also, someone stopped me after church and told me that my attire was not 'respectful' to God and that our culture's overall lack of respect is why the world is going to hell (somehow my dress became equated with the number of abortions in our society). And it's also being said that I don't like old people (mostly since we don't make habit of singing the doxology), which has been thrown in as some added bonus to the rest of it.

When you compare these two realities it becomes clear that the church's ineffectiveness is directly linked to our inability to look beyond our own noses. There were a couple of grumblings at the beginning of Holy Week . . . from people who did not participate in one single event throughout the remainder of the week. (We had a lot of stuff going on this year.) This helps show that those who are willing to journey with Christ will have his perspective in the world, while those who forego daily submission to him highlight their own lack of spiritual formation.

Life is going on today, whether or not the church is aware of such a fact. But it takes more than constructing walls which keep believers safe from the outsiders. It takes the courage to open doors so that the righteous can go out and the unrighteous come in, all for the transformation which comes from pure holiness. Without such the people of God are simply lost in their own existence, while the world around us continues to pass away without hope.