Menu Close

“You are going to feel like hell if you never write the stuff that is tugging on the sleeves of your heart — your stories, visions, memories, visions and songs. Your truth, your version of things, your own voice. That is really all you have to offer us. And that’s also why you were born.”
Anne Lamott

“You are going to feel like hell if you never write the stuff that is tugging on the sleeves of your heart — your stories, visions, memories, visions and songs. Your truth, your version of things, your own voice. That is really all you have to offer us. And that’s also why you were born.”
Anne Lamott

Category: THE CHURCH

THE CHURCH (10)

George 0 Comments

This post is a break from Hans Kung and Real Church to share a post by Richard Beck in which he suggest transitions he would like to see in the church.

Transitions for Church

I would like the church to begin making the following transitions:

  • Choice to Character
  • Rhetoric to Behavior Change
  • Trying to Training
  • Evangelism to Moral Formation
  • Missions to Social Justice
  • Moral Blame to Moral Luck

Choice to Character: I think the church makes mistakes when she is overly confident in her appeals to choice. The church should rather focus on the formation of character and the acquisition of virtue. 

Rhetoric to Behavior Change: Elaborating further, character is not formed by persuasive rhetoric (i.e., a weekly appeal from the pulpit to be a good person). Rhetoric is excellent for changing opinions and, thus, an excellent tool for improving doctrine. But it is a poor tool for transforming the lives in the pew. That is, we are NOT volitionally nimble. We possess characterological inertia and causal forces will need to be brought to bear upon us to form us into the image of Christ. The word form (as in mold or shape) nicely captures the idea. We don’t choose. We are formed.

Trying to Training: Thus, the focus of Kingdom living is less about “trying to be a better person” (via what William James called a “slow heave of the will”) than about “training to be a better person.” Church should be a kind of boot camp for Kingdom living.

Evangelism to Moral Formation: What I mean here is an evangelism that is volitionally-based, the traditional “Do you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior? Yes or no?.” The move should be to what Jesus asked for in the Great Commission: “Make disciples.” Again, the word make gets at the idea very well.

Missions to Social Justice: These last two go together. Mission work should move away from “persuasion models” to actually changing the world. The question for missionaries should shift from “How many souls were saved?” to “How have you transformed that community into the Kingdom of God?” 

Moral blame to Moral Luck: We shift from seeing the moral landscape as populated by the “righteous” and the “blameworthy” to seeing the “fortunate” and the “unfortunate.” As Immanuel Kant said: “And how many there are who may have lead a long blameless life, who are only fortunate in have escaped so many temptations.”

If we make this shift, from strong volitional to weak volitional models, what gets lost? Actually very little. And the gains are enormous. By embracing causality and the contingent nature of will–by focusing on Character over Choice–the church might actually start being more effective (a nice causal word) in this world. We will rely less and less on God Talk and more and more on, well, actually doing things. You know, make a difference.

But what does get lost in this shift away from strong volitional models is a robust sense of moral blame or praise. In the contingent picture I paint you can’t take credit for your good character and neither can we “blame” others for poor character. Yet much of Christian theology seems to hinge on notions of moral praise and blame. Particularly soteriological visions of Heaven and Hell. 

Of course, Beck is not the final word on THE CHURCH, but I believe he provides some thoughtful and important insights into the nature and character of the church today. His suggested transitions are worthy of serious consideration.

Still on the Journey

THE CHURCH (9) – Real Church 1.3

George 0 Comments

The vital question is… by what criterion are we to judge that the Church is now headed in the right direction?
Answering first in the negative, Kung comments, …the Church is not on the right path so long as it adapts itself to the present; nor is it on the right path as long as it holds fast to the past. 
How do we know the Church is on the right path? — … the Church is headed in the right direction when, whatever the age in which it lives, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is its criterion..

This post is mostly a stream of consciousness regarding “How do we know the church is on the right path?”. I prefer “How do we know the church is on the wrong path?”. I am much better at seeing what is wrong than what is right. As I continue to ponder, I’m finding a lot of threads to pull. The church tapestry I created over many years is unraveling.

This quote from Kung cited earlier is an example of one those threads: “… the salvific act in Jesus Christ is the origin of the Church; but it is more than the starting point or the first phase of its history, it is something which at any given time determine the whole history of the Church and defines its essential nature.”
The restoration movement, which is my heritage, marked the Day of Pentecost as the origin of the church. The NT book of Acts was the blueprint for the church, particularly 2:38-47. ( I wrote a post about my church heritage. You can read it HERE.) The Day of Pentecost as the church’s origin shaped our ecclesiology profoundly. For example, the book of acts was the primary resource for teaching and preaching. The rest of New Testament was relevant but clearly secondary. The four Gospels were admired but were mostly for devotional reading while the important work was done in the instruction manual, Acts, and the apostle Paul’s epistles. Cornerstones of true church’s buildings were engraved with “Established AD 33″. The Old Testament was irrelevant to ecclesiology. I remember the distribution of handy little —”The New Testament and Psalms ” — Bibles. The endgame was getting church right, everything else became a means to that end.

Perhaps you find what I described above as troubling as I do. However, I suggest that premise is widely held in western Christianity and shapes perceptions about what church is and should look like. There are many variations but at the core is Pentecost. It seems to me, more than ever, the endgame is getting church right. It is for that reason, I find Kung’s declaration : — “…the Church is headed in the right direction when, whatever the age in which it lives, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is its criterion.” — an important shift from getting church “right” to embracing the origin of the church as “God’s salvific act in Jesus Christ”, a concrete reality in which the essence of Church — real church is found.

It is difficult, maybe impossible, to set aside preconceived notions of church and reimagine church. Perhaps some Sunday school “desert island” speculation could be helpful.

What if ?, there were 200 God believers on a desert island, born and raised with no contact with the outside world, except for a bottle that washed up on the beach which contained the following note:
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life; he has rescued you from the dominion of darkness and brought you all into the kingdom of the Son he loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.”
Limited to a single statement of God’s salvific act in his Son, what would their ecclesiology be?
As with most “desert island” questions, its improbably tempts one to discount any relevance, but if the origin of the church is God’s salvific act in Jesus Christ, it seems to be a good starting point on the path to discovering real church.

At this point, I say, with reasonable confidence, that their life and community would be characterized primarily by what Good News produces — gratitude .

Posts to follow will continue exploring ecclesiology of “The Good News in a Bottle Church”. Creative insights are welcome. Critiques also.

Still on the journey.

THE CHURCH (8) – Real Church 1.2

George 0 Comments

…real church is not adapting to the present nor is it holding to the past — now all I need to do to find real church whose criterion is the Gospel of Jesus Christ! 
In the next post, I intend to wrestle with what a church looks like whose criterion is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Often when I am thinking and writing about a particular thread, a related post, article and/or reference mysteriously appears. Today was one of those occasions. With the ink barely dry on my previous Real Church post , Michael Frost’s post entitled “If Jesus planted a church, what would it look like?” hit my in-box.
He addresses directly the challenge to wrestle with what a church looks like whose criterion is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. His insights provide an excellent starting point for further conversation. I encourage you to read his entire post.

I intend to incorporate his thoughts as I continue to pursue real church. Here’s a sample:

Here’s what the church that Jesus built looks like – a people who acknowledge him as their king, offering all of their lives under his authority, working on living out this constellation of values:

This is not the first time Michael Frost has dropped into my life unexpectedly. Several decades ago, I discovered he and Alan Hirst were conducting a seminar on their book “The Shaping of Things to Come: Innovation and Mission for the 21 Century Church”. Attending their seminar and reading the book was a significant influence in the development of my evolving ecclesiology. It is good to hear from Michael again.

Still on the journey

THE CHURCH (7) – Real Church 1.1

George 0 Comments

This post continues thoughts on Real Church. Read the previous post HERE.

I am resolved that my pursuit of “real church” will be one of discovery and I will resist my compelling need to explain. As Crabb concludes: “The passion to explain leads us along a path that ends badly.” 

My responsibility is to know I reside on a continuum between an idealized church and the real church. My mission is to discover and surrender to the will of God for His gathered people, in that pilgrimage the real church will come forth.

I remain committed to the statements from the previous Real Church post. However, three weeks since writing that post, struggling with the idea of real church, I realize just how much of a challenge, perhaps impossibility, it is to set aside my idealized abstractions about church and discover real church. That understanding is important, otherwise my pursuit will only lead me to confirm my idealized abstractions. I have no illusion that I will discover “the” real church, but I do believe I can move closer to real church.
Although I am not a theologian,Kung was encouraging
“…the theologian learns by his mistakes and that if he is prevented from making any, he is prevented from constructive thinking; that it takes time not only to find the truth but also for the truth to take effect in the Church generally, in the face of innumerable obstacles, of the prejudices and pretexts of an opinion communis which masquerades as genuine doctrine.”
My hope is for —constructive thinking , some truth regarding real church and patience for truth to take effect.

Returning to Hans Kung’s book “THE CHURCH”, I believe he is helpful in creating a starting point to pursue real church. Here are some citations:

Rather than talking about an ideal Church situated in the abstract celestial spheres of theological theory, we shall consider the real Church as it exists in our world, and in human history. The New Testament itself does not begin by laying down a doctrine of the Church which has then to be worked out in practice; it starts with the Church as reality, and reflection upon it comes later. The real Church is first and foremost a happening, a fact, an historical event. The real essence of the of the real Church is expressed in historical form.

The “essential nature” of the Church is not to be found in some unchanging Platonic haven of ideas, but only in the history of the Church. The real Church not only has a history , it exists by having a history. There’s is no “doctrine” of the Church in the sense of an unalterable metaphysical and ontological system, but one which is historically conditioned , within the framework of the history of the Church, its dogmas and its theology.

God’s salvific act in Jesus Christ is the origin of the Church; but it is more than the starting point or the first phase of its history, it is something which at any given time determine the whole history of the Church and defines its essential nature.

For those who believe the Church is headed in the wrong direction. Kung poses an essential question “…by what criterion are we to judge that the Church is headed in the right direction?” I believe the starting point to determine criterion by which to judge is understanding the essence of the Church. Paraphrasing Kung, the essence of real Church is found in its origin, a happening, a fact, a reality — namely, God’s salvific act in Jesus Christ.

“It [the Church] stand or falls by its links with its origins in Jesus and its message ; it remains permanently dependent for the ground of of its existence, on God’s saving act in Jesus Christ, which is valid for all time and so also in the present.”

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,
1 Corinthians 15:3-4 – NIV

The Church must constantly reflect upon its real existence in the present with reference to its origins in the past, in order to assure its existence in the future.

Kung

Pursuing “real church” begins with an assessment of a church’s loyalty to the essential nature (essence) of “real church”, a church that is …committing itself to each new day afresh, accepting the changes and transformations of history and human life, constantly willing to reform, to renew, and rethink.”

Concluding the essence of real church originates in the reality of God’s saving act in Jesus Christ is a game changer for me. When I consider that the Day of Pentecost is when I have believed the church was established, there are profound implications. My idealistic, abstract notions of church as described on the day of Pentecost are inadequate criterion to judge a church’s loyalty to the essential nature of real church.

As Kung states, a concern that the church is headed in the wrong direction must be taken seriously. The vital question is… by what criterion are we to judge that the Church is now headed in the right direction?
Answering first in the negative, he comments, …the Church is not on the right path so long as it adapts itself to the present; nor is it on the right path as long as it holds fast to the past.
How do we know the Church is on the right path? — … the Church is headed in the right direction when, whatever the age in which it lives, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is its criterion..

Well at least that narrows it down —real church is not adapting to the present nor is it holding to the past — now all I need to do to find real church whose criterion is the Gospel of Jesus Christ!
In the next post, I intend to wrestle with what a church looks like whose criterion is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

THE CHURCH (6) Real Church

George 0 Comments

 “it is high time to think about, as Kung calls it, is …the real church.”

…no matter how many old movies you have in your DVD collection or how often you watch them, you can’t go back to the time and cultural context that forged them. Any attempt in the present to make something like Casablanca or The Manchurian Candidate or [insert your favorite here] will essentially fall short. It will be a reproduction that apes the signature characteristics — dress, décor, modes of speech, vehicles, and so on — of another time. Similary, a Civil War re-enactor’s club may help keep the memory of that history alive, but it doesn’t make that history present. At the end of the day, the actors put away their muzzle loaders, change back into their normal clothes and drive home to their modern dwellings with electricity, indoor plumbing, and internet.

Steve Skojec

Being convinced that that no “one true church” exists today is not to imply that the Church does not exist. In my understanding, scripture unequivocally confirms, not only that that the Church exists — it is real.

Rather than talking about an ideal church situated in the abstract celestial spheres of theological theory, we [should] consider the real Church as it exists in our world and in human history. The New Testament itself does not begin by laying down a doctrine of the Church which has then to be worked out in practice; it starts with the Church as reality, and reflection upon it comes later. The real church is first and foremost a happening, a fact, an historical event.

Hans Kung – THE CHURCH

In the midst of writing this post, I was “called” to mow my yard. As is my custom, I use the time mowing to listen to various podcasts. My choice, one of my regulars, was Josh Graves at Otter Creek Church. His sermon was “Deep Church”, one in a series entitled “Church, Why Bother?”
My intention for this post was to pursue Hans Kung’s thoughts on the real church. However, Josh’s sermon and an unexpected conversation with a Nepalese seminarian diverted me. I will return to Kung later.

Pondering the idea of “real church”, I wonder how my pursuit of “real church” is different than a quest for” the one true church” or “restoring the NewTestament Church” ? This is an important question, if there is no difference, any conclusion I reach about “real church” will be nothing more than another idealistic, abstract notion.
I believe the difference lies in discovery verses explanation. I was reminded of this distinction as I “discovered” an excerpt from Larry Crabb I cited many years ago. Worthy of another post, it is entitled “Fire Lighters” you can read it HERE.

Isa 50:10-11
Who among you fears the LORD and obeys the word of his servant?
Let him who walks in the dark, who has no light, trust in the name of the LORD
and rely on his God.
But now, all you who light fires and provide yourselves with flaming torches, go, walk in the light of your fires and of the torches you have set ablaze.
This is what you shall receive from my hand: You will lie down in torment.

I am resolved that my pursuit of “real church” will be one of discovery and I will resist my compelling need to explain. As Crabb concludes: “The passion to explain leads us along a path that ends badly.”

Resisting the need to explain is essential, not only in the pursuit of “real church”, but , also in growing faith in God. There are a couple of metaphors I’ve written about before, that can be helpful in avoiding a path of explanation.

Mirage,
“…an illusion of something that is real“. All images of church today are a mirage, illusions of what is real. They are not false , but they are not real.My task is not to explain why or why not they are false, but to discover what is real.

Jigsaw Puzzle
If all existing truth [about church] were represented by a jigsaw puzzle, what we know would only be a few pieces from the puzzle. This means that what we know can only be known in varying degrees of probability, since after all, we only have a small portion of the entire puzzle—we are always drawing conclusions based off of partial information. (Zachary Broom)
My task is to continuously discover the entire puzzle.

Because we are redeemed and flawed people of God … ecclesia…body of Christ we must be humbled by the truth that we are the church now — but not yet. My responsibility is to know I reside on a continuum between an idealized church and the real church. My mission is to discover and surrender to the will of God for His gathered people, in that pilgrimage the real church will come forth. Perhaps that is why Kung declared, in part, …” the inner nature [of the church] can only be seen by believing Christians”.
Walking in the light of our own fires and torches will only bring torment.

Discovery is not an event, it is an adventure.

Still on the journey.