sustain:if:able kiwi

what is theology?

I am currently enjoy Cultural Transformation and Religious Practice by Graham Ward, in preparation for teaching my 2007 Masters course: Critical Missional Issues and the Emerging Church. He defines theology as having three functions:

“First, with respect to interpreting the Scriptures; secondly with respect to the teaching of the Church; and thirdly, with a discernment of the contemporary work of Christ in the context of any activity undertaken.”

All 3 are distinct. All 3 are important.

Today on the way in the car, one of my daughters entered an existing conversation late. She had been reading her book, and popped her head up. Her entry into the conversation simply blurred, and confused us all.

I wonder how many confusions and arguments about the emerging church occur because conversational categories simply get blurred. For instance; is there not a blurring when:
Steve Chalk’s writing on Christ and our contemporary context is butted hard against Carson’s way of interpreting Scriptures; or
Reformed theology (a historic and contextual teaching of the Church) is butted against the 7 Jesus’s as McLaren tries to make sense of Christ in our contemporary context.

I found Ward’s categories helpful and it left me wondering what would happen if these 3 categories were used to guide our conversations?

what is church

After almost 3 years at Opawa Baptist I finally found some time to put up some posters. Here is my favourite, a mix of advertising poster and a quote that for me sums up a Biblical ecclesiology.

“The story of Acts is the story of a community inspired to make a continual series of creative experiments by the Pentecostal Spirit.” Quote by Fison in Fire Upon the Earth, 79.

Any chance of these being used as criteria for evaluation of emerging churches:
1. Where are the Biblical narratives shaping the journey of the church?
2. How much is the future the participatory work of a community?
3. Where are the signs of creative and innovative partnership with the Spirit?

See also my recent post on emerging church is local church.

emerging churches are local churches

“The people I talked to at [Jacobs Well] had never heard of Emergent or of McLaren.” Great quote from an excellent article in Christian Century about Jacobs Well, an emerging church in Kansas City.

It takes a good hard look at a local church; their love of arts and home grown music, their love of place and awareness of context, their breadth of ecumenical relationships and commitment to authenticity.

We need lots and lots of stories like this – stories of local churches doing local mission. That is emerging church. I contrast this with yet another email, sent to me overnight by an American fundamentalist, bagging some abstract category called “emerging church.”

What a waste of his time. “Emerging” will never be found in books or blogs or conferences. It is found as local Christians seek to Incarnate Christ in their local neighbourhoods.

Hat tip to Coops

wanting to really get your teeth into the emerging and missional church

Looks like I am teaching 2 new papers around the area of emerging and missional church in 2007.

ONE: Critical missional issues: Emerging Church as part of Tyndale Graduate School Master of Theological Studies. Auckland, 11-13 April and 2-5 October. The course description is as follows: This course will explore critical issues in the missional church, with particular attention to the emerging church. Students will consider the emerging church in relation to themes of cultural analysis, practices, ecclesiological innovation and contemporary missiology. They will further consider major criticism of the emerging church in relation to the bible, doctrine and ecclesiology. By taking this case study approach to the emerging church, the paper will teach two theological skills. Firstly, that of reading a living theology; and the skills of being able to situate contemporary church practices within a multiple set of contexts. Secondly, that of faithful discernment; and the skills of being able to discern contemporary church practices in relation to faithfulness to the trajectories of Christianity.

TWO: Leadership in the Missional church. By taking this paper, students will learn to read a context, discern theological themes in lived experience, describe a missional project, appreciate missional literature and integrate it into church life today. The paper will be taught over a year, with a mix of on-line access and monthly coaching and is best suited to those in existing church ministry.

THREE: I am also pencilled in to teach an Introduction to the emerging church in Christchurch, May 4, 5 2007.

Should be a fun year.

the diversity of Sydney Anglicans

Recently I expressed my sadness over an article flaming the emerging church, written in a Sydney Anglican newspaper. I wrote to the reporter and was granted a cordial and thoughtful reply. Hat tip to the reporter, Madeleine Collins.

The article took another turn when it became apparent that the reporting had included the taking of a web-based April fools joke as fact. The rather earnest Anglican error was duly lampooned on Australian TV. Which seemed to illicit a certain schadenfreude (enjoyment obtained from the troubles of others) in a number of blog circles. (Always wanted to use that word schadenfreude in a blog post:))

Anyhow, I am fascinated to find yet a further step in the saga. Here are excerpts of a letter in reponse to the article (June 2006);

I’m writing in response to your recent article “True Confession of the Emerging Church” (SC May’06) to ask the question why is Southern Cross so negative and quick to criticise fellow (evangelical) Christians? …

Peter Brain, Bishop of Armidale

Link

So there you are. A bishop of Brain no less. My impression of Sydney Anglicans has just been deepened.

emerging church course ver 2.0

I am currently reworking my two-day Introduction to the Emerging Church course. I taught it for the first time last year. A second draft (2.0) will be unveiled at BCNZ Christchurch over the next two Saturday’s (16th and 23rd). The feedback on the course last year was very positive. Nevertheless, I have still made significant changes.

Introduction to the emerging church (ver 2.0) includes
– a tighter missional theology, drawing specifically on Luke 10:1-12, which offers a fascinating twist on themes of Trinity and Incarnation.
– using 5 minute video interviews (some still in the process of being shot, so HOT off the press!) from Al Roxburgh; espresso; Sanctus1; Safe Space and Freeway;
– tying these lived community narratives into Gibbs and Bolgers typology of emerging churches as identifying with the life of Jesus, transforming secular space, living as a community
– a greater focus on offering a wide range of concrete practices of spiritual formation, Biblical engagement, worship and community
– more of a deliberate encouragement of emerging churches as a mixed economy, with wide variety and in a range of relationship with established churches.

With the revamp done, bring on Saturday.

looking in an emerging mirror

Anthony Stiffs has produced an incredibly helpful reflection on the emerging church.

Part 1 – What is the emerging church?; Part 2 – Missiological contours of the emerging church; Part 3 – Missiological praxis of the emerging church; Part 4 – Missiological trajectories of the emerging church.

I have some minor quibbles.
1. He claims D. A Carson is one who has studied the emerging church movement by participating in it. I certainly don’t see that in Carson’s writing and I would love to see Anthony’s evidence for this claim.
2. He asserts the following quote to Andrew Jones; A postmodern monastery – Combining authentic, low-budget group creativity with the task of preserving technical knowledge within the rhythms of prayer in order to cross the digital divide and catalyse open source spirituality; when in fact Andrew is quoting me!
3. I don’t think he fully appreciates what I am saying when he quotes my A-Z of the Emerging Church. When I say “W = white and western. Sorry but we are. It’s a sociological reality. But let’s not stay here. It is a journey. It’s time for genuine partnership” I am expressing the same concern he is; that the emerging church needs to be more ethnically diverse.

Anthony has still to post Part 5 – his critique of the emerging church. I am looking forward to that.

Why? Why do I find myself listening to Anthony and not others?

I appreciate the fact he seems to start with an open hand and not preconceived prejudice. I love that he proceeds from a missiological perspective. I appreciate that he uses a wide range of sources – blogs, books and actual communities – and that adds depth to his analysis. I sense a good amount of people caring, wise listening and discernment. And perhaps most important, I sense that he is not pushing idealisms. I might be wrong, but I sense that he too “still has not found what he is looking for.” He comes as a fellow pilgrim, not a finger pointing expert.

writing for mission

I have been posting less frequently in the last 10 days because I have been doing some other writing for print media, who have different deadlines and different rules on copyright.

1. A 3,000 word piece of Ministry Today, a UK journal. I have been asked to reflect on emerging church within traditional church, so I have been playing with my recent ministry journey, God as Trinity and a multi-congregational model. In many ways it is a Postcard 10, another chapter, for my Out of Bounds Church? book.

2. A 1,000 word piece for the New Zealand Baptist magazine. I contrast the mission of the Great Commission with the mission of Luke 10:1-12. 3 themes; mission as God’s idea (not our idea), central (not an extra for the mature), changing us (before we think about changing them). I am wondering if our changing world means we find Biblical resources in fresh places.

This is another step in the Mission Reader and emerging AD:missions projects (see here and here). I am also bouncing off David Bosch’s Transforming Mission. (IMHO no-one should be allowed to talk about emerging church until they have read this book. It is such an essential missionary text). Bosch suggests six periods in mission history; Jesus and early church [added in thanks to vigilant comment of Dave]; primitive; patristic; reformation; enlightenment; ecumenical (or postmodern).

He argues that each mission period is shaped by a different Biblical text which indicates a different overall frame of reference and way of understanding God, humans and the world.

John 3:16 in the patristic Period (the love of God, seen in the sending of Jesus, is extended by God’s messengers);

Luke 14:23 in the Middle Ages (compel them to come in!);

Romans 1:16 in the Reformation (God’s rightliving means grace and mercy, not punishment);

The Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20) in the Enlightenment period.

“The transition from one paradigm to another is not abrupt … This produces a kind of theological schizophrenia, which we just have to put up with while at the same time groping our way toward greater clarity … The point is simply that the Christian church in general and the Christian mission in particular are today confronted with issues they have never even dreamt of and which are crying out for responses that are both relevant to the times and in harmony with the essence of the Christian faith …. The point I am making is simply that, quite literally, we live in a world fundamentally different … The contemporary world challenges us to practice a “transformational hermeneutics”, a theological response which transforms us first before we involve ourselves in mission to the world.” (Bosch, pages 188, 189).

Bosch suggests the immense challenges of our contemporary world are signs of a transition into a new period. He notes 13 trajectories. I am wondering aloud in this Baptist article if Luke 10:1-12 might need to be our new dominant mission text.

emerging and anglo-catholics

Some fascinating discussion going on in the post “How exclusive is the emerging church?” I pulled out this comment from big bulky anglican because I think it’s worthy of further discussion: I think that emerging churches tended to be populated by evangelicals discovering what anglo-catholics have known for decades – symbolism, faith in daily life, ritual and variety, daily offices.

1. Does the comment resonnate with you ie are you an “emerging church evangelical who is discovering symbolism, faith in daily life, ritual, daily offices”?

2. If you answered yes to (1), why are you finding them (symbolism, faith in daily life, ritual, daily offices) helpful?

3. What (if any) changes or appropriations have you made to how symbolism, faith in daily life, ritual, daily offices have been traditionally practiced?

4. Why might some sections of the church have lost/ignored these practices? What might we learn from this about the use and re-use of symbolism, faith in daily life, ritual, daily offices?

how exclusive is the emerging church?

The emerging church is regularly charged with the crime of exclusivity. This nameless entity which exists only in the conversational relationships between interested parties; earns cartoon fame for its homegenity and causes practioners to consider whether they are institutional racists!

This week at Opawa we have welcomed Nigel and family, to do a workplace “internship” with us. All week I have marvelled at the irony of an English Anglican ordinand from a historically Anglo-Catholic theological institution, doing time with a historically conservative New Zealand Baptist Church.

An outsider, a local Anglican, someone with sharp powers of observation, made the comment; “wow, the emerging church certainly creates interesting partnerships.”

And so I lay this comment alongside the charges of exclusivity. Is the emerging church exclusive, or might it be that there is a simultaneous loosening of old networks and the forming of new networks?

This should not be an excuse for exclusivity or a lack of hospitality. Nevertheless, I will self-flagellate myself less this week with the ropes of post-colonial guilt.

contemporary ways of being the people of God

The church around the world is changing. This course charts emerging church trends and evaluates their potential for Christian life today. Topics will include:
the Bible and spiritual formation
worship and mission
new forms of emerging church.

A course I am teaching, Saturday, September 16 and September 23, 2006. For more info go here

there is no such thing as emerging church

Given that I don’t have a Mac, a goatee or sunglasses, I find this cartoon hilariously funny.

Link

It also names a personal wondering of mine over the last few weeks: is there is any such thing as emerging church?

I wrote this a few weeks ago: The emerging church seems (IMHO) to be a shared conversation among people, groups and churches, about life and faith in a changing contemporary context. But it is so easy to objectify the stories and to read the conversation as monolithic, as “this is the emerging church.” In doing so, the stories have been stripped of context. They are then in danger of commodification, as books, websites, podcasts etc. (A few sentences buried in a jet-lagged post about place and cross-cultural storytellinghere).

In other words; there is a conversation between various people about mission, faith, God, church in a postmodern context. This conversation has become commodified and homogenised into a universalist label “emerging church.”

The result
– the focus has become the conversation rather than the work of missional communities
– like any good conversation, it has no “leader.” Thus it has very few mechanism to respond to critics. (This infuriates critics even more.)
– words and labels can so easily be used to exclude and include
– we are in danger of homogenising voices and contexts and in so doing, obscure difference.

reviewing carson

Beth Dickson has a very clever review of Don Carson’s Becoming Conversant with Emergent Church in Partnership Perspectives January 2006 (not online). Here are some quotes:

Carson believes strongly in the power of argument to persuade people. In reading his book what struck me most strongly was not so much the content of his arguments but the way in which he conducted them

Carson seems to have no awareness of how such an unkind manner of arguing is likely to prejudice people against the argument, even if they generally share his point of view.”

Note to self: How I say things can be more important in communication than what I say.

flamed for Spirit as fire

Graceway, the church I was part of planting, just got flamed by the Sydney Anglicans. It was a worship service I was part of leading (come on Graceway when are you going to update the website that I built. It’s so 90’s :)!), so I’m in the firing line.

Graceway, a church in Auckland, New Zealand, encouraged its members to ‘pray with your hand around a cup of coffee’ as a way of experiencing the Spirit ‘as warmth in your spirituality’ … According to prominent evangelical church leaders, all are symptomatic of a dangerous protest against biblical orthodoxy … “This is not biblical theology,” says Canon Jim Ramsay, Director of Sydney Diocese’s Evangelism Ministries. “It’s a shaking of Christian orthodoxy.”

I presume they were cutting one fragment out of this service of worship, in which we focused on the Spirit as fire.

Can I point out that the service order also describes the reading out of 6 different lots of Scripture (Exodus 3/1 Corinthians 3/Jeremiah 20:8/Matthew 3:11/John 21/Isaiah 6:6-7). This was never mentioned in the article. 6 lots of Scripture. And it’s not Biblical theology! 6 lots of Scripture!

Full article here.