Notes from the Michael Moynagh conference on June 5, 2003 in Paris
Stuart MURRAY-WILLIAMS spent 12 years as a pioneer church-planter on the east side of London in Tower Hamlet. He continues to be involved in church-planting as a trainer, writer, and consultant. For 9 years, he taught evangelism and church-planting at Spurgeon's College in London. He is president of the UK Anabaptist Network, editor of Anabaptism Today, and author of several books on starting new churches, urban mission, and the challenges of a post-christian world.
Since September 2001, he has worked as a trainer and consultant about emerging forms of the church. He is a part-time tutor in the area of community learning at Regent's Park College, Oxford, where he leads the training program DELTA that is supported by 3 Baptist universities.
Thus, he is able to share with us a rich practical experience and a well-developed sociological and theological reflection. His book Church Planting: Laying Foundations (Paternoster Press: 1998, reprinted 2000) is an important reference book. In it, he treats the relationship between a changing culture and the ethos of churches. How do we develop a pertinence with these cultural changes and the practices of our churches? This question is a crucial one for existing churches. Starting from his practical and theoretical experiences, he embraces an even larger domain in an open-minded fashion in order to stimulate reflection among Christians from different countries and denominational backgrounds.
|
STAR TREK
Original: Modernity
The Next Generation and Voyager: Post-Modernity
3 sessions
1st: Intro to changes taking place in our culture. Looks forward to seeing the
differences between France and the UK.
2nd & 3rd: The Church and the way that the Church is or isn’t responding
to the cultural changes. Experiments taking place in church. In UK, term “emerging
church.” Ways in which Christians are exploring fresh ways of doing church,
especially in marginal places. What can we learn?
Starting point: We’re in a time of cultural change
in a particularly turbulent way in Western culture.
· Period of several decades
2 major aspects of this period of change.
1st: Transition from modernity to post-modernity.
· Many are getting tired of the term “postmodern”
2nd: Transition from Christian to post-Christian.
· He has a book coming out in 2005 on this subject.
We live in a period of overlap.
Transition is partial at this point.
Most of us function in the 2 of them at different times.
Good that his airplane pilot last night was “modern” in how he flew,
as he knew where he was flying toward.
Difficulty of this time of overlap: the need to be bilingual and speak languages
of modernity and post-modernity.
Need courage and humility.
Need to experiment and reflect.
Post: “after”.
· Modernity isn’t what it used to be
· Looks back
· It’s not like it used to be when it was modern.
· If we knew where we were going, we would name it.
· Many “post” words scattered in our culture.
· Language is accurate and appropriate, as it doesn’t claim too
much.
· Things are changing, but we’re quite uncertain where we’re
going.
· Not a good time to brand strategies.
· Time for experimentation, reflection, humility and courage.
3 PREVIOUS TRANSITION TIMES:
1st: 4th century shift to Christianity. After 300 years on the margin, Christianity
came to the center. Rich, powerful, and central. Relation between church and
state radically changed. Things look different from the center. After Constantine’s
conversion, many things in church and European culture changed in the following
decades.
2nd: 16th century fragmentation of Christianity. Before there were some movements on the margin, but there was one culture. Now it was broken into several movements: Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Calvinist. All claimed to be a Christian society, but they fought each other. Growing number thought that Christianity wasn’t good in itself. With all the changes in the 16th century, Christianity survived as many mini-Christianities.
3rd: 18th century enlightenment. Movement toward secularism. Has idea religious of moving from the darkness and superstition of the medieval world to the light of science. Response to the religious warfare in the previous century. Search for a new fashion to reunite the society apart from Christianity, which seemed to divide it. Culture of modernity arose from this.
Shift from Christianity to post-Christianity. Many ways that the church functioned in Christian era no longer make sense.
Today the 2 movements interacting and reacting.
POSTMODERNITY
What is it?
· Some suggest that it is taking shape as an alternative culture.
· Others say that it’s simply a transitional phase. Something new
will emerge, but we can’t clearly tell what it is.
· Others say that postmodernity will give way to modernity, as modernity
is still too strong.
But it is obvious that the changes are taking place in our culture.
· Celebration of technology and enterprise
· Name of starship Enterprise
· Continuing progress to a wonderful human future
· The conquering hero, the rugged individual
· Set 2-3 centuries in the future at a time when most diseases had been
cured, poverty no longer existed, science had solved all the problems of humanity,
and we were on our way to conquer the galaxy.
· Human values were emphasized.
· Technology outdated.
· Short skirts on female officers. Women answered telephone.
· Expression of confidence that technology would deliver.
· Hero was Captain Kirk, going from planet to planet, always sneaking
around the Prime Directive so he can right wrongs and make the universe safe
for democracy.
· Person who ensured that progress was made was Mr. Spock, who used logic,
reason, science, and technology. Half human, half Vulcan. Afraid of own emotions
and constantly trying to suppress them, as his Vulcan father did. Ideal modernity
man. But wasn’t fully human.
· Full of confidence, progress, movement.
· Mission “to explore new worlds, to seek out new civilizations”
and to bring those civilizations into the Federation. Conquest.
· Better technology
· Better balance of men and women who play a much more integrated role.
· Important figure was a counselor concerned about feelings and emotions.
· Android Data was equivalent of Mr. Spock. Everything that Mr. Spock
wanted to become. Machine logical, rational. However, Data wanted to become
human.
· About the community. About what it means to live together as a society.
About redefining our cultural values.
· Greater respect for nonhuman realities and for alien ways of thinking.
Multiculturalism.
· The Prime Directive isn’t just a plot device to be cheated by
the captain. It’s a moral guide to keep the Enterprise crew from screwing
up other cultures.
· Learning from alien cultures rather than assimilating them.
· Female captain.
· Rather than traveling outwards, it is a lost ship trying to return
home.
Mood & style distinguish postmodernity from modernity.
Lost optimism of progress.
Less confident
Wonder if science and technology will wipe us out, rather than solve our problems.
1899
· At start of 20th c., much enthusiasm.
· Eradicate disease and poverty.
· Unite humanity and have no war.
· Evangelize the whole world.
1999
· Mood very different
· Tried to celebrate
· Millenium bug
Maybe in a transitional phase, after which modernity will
assert itself.
As we have postmodernity today, it probably isn’t strong enough to survive.
Whatever emerges will probably be more humble and wise than before.
Stuart Murray is torn when thinking about postmodernity.
Good: liberating
Bad: just plan silly
As Christians, we are to ask how the Gospel relates to this changing culture.
What does the Gospel affirm and what does it challenge?
Postmodernity says about modernity what Christians have been saying about it
for several decades.
The critique rings many bells with Christians.
We can welcome much of this.
But postmoderntiy also raises lots of questions
Post-christendom
Some of the signs of the end of Christianity are obvious
Declining numbers.
Church which was at the center is now on margin
Some see no contribution of the church to society
Difficulty getting people involved.
Christian story is not known like it used to be.
Church is not just smaller, but also has less influence, and the gap between
church and culture is larger.
New situation in mission, different from what it was for many centuries.
In Christendom, everyone knew the story. They might not believe it, live it by it, but they knew it and understood the language.
Now, many people don’t know the story or understand the language. But because we’re in this transition, it’s not true with everyone.
Today many people don’t know the story, but they think
that they do.
They associate the story with a fading culture.
In Christendom, the story that you know, apply it for yourself.
Billy Graham was good at this. But most who came to faith through this style
already knew the story.
In the future, we will start with a situation where people don’t know the story at all. They may react how they did with the early missionaries, like Paul & Barnabas. It’s a new story that is interesting.
A 13 year old in England heard the Christmas story and didn’t know anything about it previously. When he heard the story, he was fascinated with it. He thanked his professor. Why has nobody told me this story before? Why did they give that baby a swear word for his name?
Difficult overlap period, a twilight zone.
We don’t have the benefits of people not knowing the story, nor of knowing
the story.
We need to have realistic expectations.
Not an easy time to build churches.
But if we survive 25 years, it might be easier.
In U.K., there is a decline, but also something even worse.
· 5 major denominations are saying that if things don’t change
in 30 years, they might not exist.
· Some denominations are now facing wipeout.
· Church of Scotland. If decline continues, they will close their last
church in Scotland in 2033.
· They might not be able to function as national denominations.
Postmodernism raises the possibility that in some sections,
Christianity may not exist.
· E.g., Asia Minor, North Africa
· Just as it was being wiped out here, there was an evangelistic thrust
elsewhere in the world.
· In some parts of the world, Christianity is growing quickly
· Center of gravity has gone south.
· Growth in many ethnic churches.
· Mission in reverse. Evangelism in England by Ghanaians, Nigerians,
and Brazilians. SIGN OF HOPE.
· The emerging church might be a SIGN OF HOPE.
Our reaction might be mixed
· Welcome
· Opposed
· Confused
Franciscans & Dominicans seem to offer alternative histories and models of practicing Christianity. One thing to do as we leave Christendom is to decide what resources we bring from Christendom to help us. What do we lay down as excess baggage no longer necessary for this time? It would be good to ask this in dialog with those in other movements. We have much to learn from the first 3 centuries when the church was on the margin. We can learn from some movements on the edge that was seen as being heretical. Many raised basic questions about Christianity.
Split between Catholic and Orthodox church was huge. But because it was primarily geographical and cultural, it didn’t fragment the church in the same way. There were 2 great movements next to each other after the Reformation.
In UK, church is usually run by modernists who don’t understand postmodernism or who don’t want to. What is sometimes presented as a generational conflict is really more based on this difference in culture. An impression is given that this is an “experiment” for the young people. When they grow up, they will learn how to do church properly. But it’s not just getting older, but also a change in culture.
Rise of youth churches in UK. Some of it is due to style of music. But it is also due to a different view of community.
Some postmodernists are having a hard time living in the structures established by modernist.
Need to listen to each other and value each
other.
Need bilingual people who can speak both languages.
People finding this most difficult are in
their 40s and 50s, especially those who hold the power.
Those in their 20s and 30s are happy to see things change
People in their 60s and 70s often are happy to see change as well.
The human sciences today. Individuals are more important than the group.
The role of the human sciences play a greater role in our churches and missions than they used to.
In the past, theology and philosophy were emphasized.
Today, science, anthropology, psychology, sociology, communication. Ways of
understanding the context.
Part of difficulty is that these are highly contested today.
Some say that the church is more individualist. Mrs. Thatcher said that there is no such thing as society. We are only individuals. Others say that this is unhealthy and unjust.
The church needs to pick its way carefully through these different evaluations. This explains why there is such diversity. Some churches stay as they are and expect society to conform to the church. Others try to become incarnate in different parts of the culture. They allow culture to shape church. Some emphasize the individual. Cyberchurches, for example. Virtual church, virtual community. Others are largely community based. The desires of the individual are subsumed in the community emphasis.
Increasing use of human sciences by those trying to do church and mission. Many benefits
Dangers
1st. Not reflecting theologically
2nd. So many different views that we get lost within them.
Some of the human sciences grew out of the missionary movement.
Pioneers in cultural anthropology were missionaries.
Use these resources, but with caution.
In some countries, there is a culture premodern. There are some slight differences in different countries.
The form that Christendom has taken in different countries will impact the form that the demise takes.
We’re seeing the fall of Christendom in western Europe, but the form is different from country to country.
Another factor is the urban/rural. Postmodernity and postchristendom is generally more advanced in cities than in the country.
In the UK, there is a North/South difference.
In the West, the U.S. is different. Different history and different shape of Christinaity taking place. Unofficial Christentom without a state church, yet surviving longer than in any other country in the West. One hard lesson for British churches is that most of the American solutions don’t work in the UK. There were many attempts in the 1990s to make them work. But they generally weren’t helpful.
Diverse, different speeds, different cultures.
Globalization affects all that we’ve talked about in many different fashions.
We now have resources that we never would have had before. We know what is happening around the world. We can see the trends more clearly.
2 dangers of this.
1st: Feel completely intimidated. So big that we can’t do anything about
it.
2nd: Miss that there are dissimiliaries happening from one country to another.
Reverse in missions: Missionaries from South are coming and sometimes repeating the errors committed 100 years ago. But they don’t have the power (economic and political) that those from the West had. Therefore, there is a need to creative effective partnerships so that we can learn from each other in a global church.
Christianity coming from Africa is a mixture of African and Western exports.
Book The Next Christianity by Philip Jenkins. Describes growth in south and asks how this will affect the church in the West and the political situation in the South, particularly where there are rapidly growing Christian groups next to Muslim ones.
Transfer of power, both globally and locally. Anglican Communion
facing a crisis over issue of homosexuality. Bishops are currently meeting to
try to hold the Anglican Communion together. One question is whether the power
will continue to be held by Westerners, who tend to be intellectual and liberal,
or those from the developing world who usually are evangelical and charismatic.
Change of gravity within a global church. How much longer will we see ourselves
as “normal Christians?”
In London, over 50% of Christians are black. The growing churches are ethnic (Caribbean, African, Asian). The global church is growing.
Ways that churches and missionaries have been responding.
This is coming from a British perspective, since that is what Murray knows.
Not completely enthusiastic about what is happening.
Fascinating, troubling,
What can we learn from these groups on the margins?
The destination is not always helpful, but the journey is.
Emergent church
Other expressions (which reflect on the priorities):
· New ways of doing church. 2 problems. (1) Seems to reject all ways
from the past. (2) Some of emerging church is not that different from the past.
Some choose to use quite ancient forms. Ancient/future church (recognizes need
for the old and the new)
· Church next
· Future church
· Fresh expressions of church
Prefers "emergent church" because it implies a
sense of movement.
Recognizes that it comes from somewhere. Pays tribute to historic church.
Something happening around edges of church in Western culture, particularly
in the UK.
Not a movement.
Seems to be spontaneous in different places.
Many different motivating factors.
Different concerns, passions
Different people telling the same story tell it differently.
In perpetual evolution.
Temporary and transitory classification.
Overall numbers in the UK are small on the edge. Not a large movement to mass.
Small groups on the margin exploring what it is to be church.
Most are monocultural.
Many serve white, middle class British Christians. (part of culture already
well represented in the church).
Will it be possible to break out of an area of strength to the areas of weakness?
Important for white, middle class Christians who are tired of church.
Losing 1,500 people every week from church in UK.
Losing not only people on the edge, but those at the heart of the church. Leaders
and those involved for 20-30 years.
New genre of Christian literature during the last decade all about why people
are leaving the church.
Disturbing fact is that people who leave the church have quite different reasons
than those given by the pastors.
95% of those who leave aren’t losing faith, but leaving the church.
Many testify that “leaving church” has been the best thing for my
faith. Liberated me to pray, worship, and share my faith with my friends. I
now can share my faith without having to bring them to church. A new surge of
spiritual life.
Questions of how long someone can believe without belonging.
Some of these are ending up in the emerging church.
Not just those who have left the church (a recovery group for ex-church members).
Emerging church is giving hope for many of those who left.
Maybe church will be different.
A way back in for some who have left church for 5-10 years.
Other forms of the emerging church are driven by mission
Aim of church is to connect with people beyond the reach of the existing church.
Gap between the culture of the church and the unchurched.
What are the groups that we have no contact with?
So far, emerging churches have had limited success, particularly in evangelism
and helping those unchurched people to enter into the church.
Some of these groups are seriously committed to this.
Many of these groups are small and isolated, not knowing if anyone else in the
country is doing the same thing. Uncertainty. Not arrogant, program-driven people.
Most are are very open and asking lots of questions. Some were in the church-planting
movement of the 1990s. From 1992 in the UK, there was a very coordinated church-planting
movement to stimulate the planting of 1000s of churches. Started well, but was
in serious decline by the 2nd half of the 1990s. One reason was that we weren’t
asking questions about what kind of church to plant. How many can we plant and
how quickly, rather than what kind of church? Dissolution that planting more
churches like the kind that people are leaving isn’t the best method.
Like an old-style tent evangelist who is aware of falling numbers coming to
his tent and deciding that the solution was a larger tent. What do we mean by
church? Most wouldn’t want to use the language of church-planting. This
implies that we know what the church is before starting. Most of these want
to raise basic questions and discover the church while on the road.
A marginal, diversified movement.
Numerically tiny, but sparking a new interest in the UK.
EXAMPLES
Robert Warren: Church happens in the middle of the circles
of mission, worship, and community. Upper, inward, and outward.
Attempt to classify emerging churches within these 3 circles
Don’t try to reach particular neighborhood, but people in the same social and interest groups.
This is happening in the Anglican Church in the UK. Wherever you want to plant a church is in someone else’s neighborhood. Argument is what we are trying to do is create a network church, so it’s not trying to take people from your parish church.
In urban areas, the parish system is out of date and doesn’t work.
Enter into even smaller networks where people are knit together through a common interest which may not be shared my most people in the community. Most aren’t well represented in the church.
Church for the science fiction community in Melbourne, Australia.
What does it look like?
Is it good to have everyone the same?
2 responses:
1st. How diverse are you anyway?
2nd. How willing are you willing to go to reach them? Accessibility.
Gothic Church (like the Adams family): style of dress, music,
network of relationships.
The church of the glorious non-dead in London.
Some of these have tried other churches, but found that they had to change how
they dressed.
How embracing can we be?
Work is where most people have many relationships. Any services during the week are difficult to make.
St. Peters church: A barge in London next to Canary Wharf, one of the large office buildings. Parish is the office block. Those who live there go to another parish church.
For many young people, the virtual community is as real
as the flesh and blood community.
Web churches.
Church in Oxford advertising for a web pastor.
Desire for authentic Christianity.
Christian meetings: a place where you go where you don’t meet anyone.
Longing for a deeper friendship and a sharing of life.
Meet in homes, often around dining room table.
Reflect on the amount of eating and drinking in the gospels and wondering why
Jesus was accused of being a drunkard and glutton.
Intimacy, encounter and recovery for people.
Place where people who aren’t Christians find faith.
Table churches often last 3-4 hours.
Liturgy interspersed with food and wine.
Alpha Course. Food, friendship & dialogue
What does one do after Alpha?
Food disappears, fellowship replaces friendship, and monologue replaces dialog.
Church started after Alpha.
· Many are post-charismatic.
· After 20 years, they would rather shoot themselves than sing another
chorus.
· Tyranny of joyfulness
· Allow for other emotions.
· Reclaim and rework ancient resources.
· Don’t want to return to old forms, but to remix the old and the
new.
· New technology (video loops, wonderful sound systems) with ancient
chants, candles, and labyrinths.
· Eclectic worship.
· Some churches realize that their churches are mixed, but resist that
each subculture needs their own congregation. Therefore a variety of expressions
in the same place. (9h00) Traditional service, (11h00) relaxed family service,
(14h00) service for comtemplation, (16h00) service in Punjabe, (18h00) youth
rave. 5 communities, but knit together.
· Is this really 1 church or 5 churches? People are free to choose which
one they want to go to. Churches like this need to find ways to function as
one. The least effective way is to have a blended service. More successful are
trips to engage in mission where you can learn from each other.
Who in our community are we not reaching?
No great interest in destroying the parish system. If used creatively, it can be a useful system. Nor do I suggest that neighborhood churches should be replaced by network churches. In some inner cities, people don’t have a network. Thus, the poorest risk to be marginalized the most. Therefore, it’s a both/and situation.
Reluctant to say things about France because he doesn’t know the situation. In the UK, people have found it easier to reach out to people like ourselves. Most people become Christians without crossing cultural and geographical borders. But the difficulty is that we don’t start with equality. We have a predominantly white, wealthy church. Cross-cultural missionaries haven’t been good historically in creating independent churches. We assume that our culture is Christian and transport it, rather than looking for ways to embody it in the form of their culture.
Emerging church is largely an urban phenomena. In the inner city, there is such desperation that we might as well try something different. Post-christianity is more advanced in cities than in the country.
Probably in rural areas, it is good to work with existing churches. But in cities, planting new churches seems to fit better with the culture of change in cities.
Is the mix of a blended style of worship not working well something that is temporary or permanent?
His preference would be for a church mixed of all ages, styles, etc. where resources from around the world can be used. This is a vision of a mature church. But for many churches, blended worship hasn’t worked well. Sometimes it is a question of power. What is called blended worship is often under the control of one group. Where there is a real depth of community, it has a chance. Or where there is a new and contextual form of worship.
But in many situations, to keep styles different may be better than to try to keep them together.
In 2 recent conversations with 2 newly arrived Baptist pastors. One inherited 2 services: one traditional and one contemporary. The other had a traditional service and tried to introduce a contemporary one. While neither said so, they both hoped that the traditional service wouldn’t die. But even without resources invested in, the traditional service grew. Why was it growing and how do I stop it? Perhaps it grew because those who wanted a contemporary service could have one, while those who liked the traditional service could invite their friends to it. This shows the value of diversity.
New monastic communities
See point 2-C. Some emerging churches are making commitment lower and lower. You come when you want to. The new monastic communities go the opposite. For some people, they need a committed community structure and support. Could be a shared daily office, a shared rule of life. Might be a dispersed community or a gathered community. Could have a mother house where everyone needs to spend a week each year. Could be a common purse community.
A growing trend, with the models different.
Mixture of old and new.
Drawing upon ancient monastic traditions, but recontextualizing it for 2003.
Parish system. In taking with 2 people in recent months who are involved with emergent churches, 1 in a pub, 1 in a school, they both independently used the term chaplain. What about this as a concept of relating to groups?
This reminds us that the parish system wasn’t the
only system that was used in the past. Chaplains working next to parish priests.
Chaplains for work, sports, hospitals, etc. Some forms of emerging church are
based around the chaplaincy model.
· Leader of St. Peters church in London is like an industrial chaplain.
· Christian DJs in the clubs.
Concern that the model of chaplaincy in the way that is was associated in the Christendom era can imply support of the status quo. One can say the Christian church has been a chaplain to European culture.
One surprising scenario that I can’t completely confirm is a group that meets on a commuter train. Urban myth? Businessmen who catch the same train to London everyday. Meet together weekly in a carriage car meet for prayer and Bible study. This has really become their church.
A liquid form of church is developing and chaplains play part of this.
2 reasons
1st: In UK, it’s not as large
2nd: Most UK cell churches aren’t new churches, but attempts to change
existing churches. This falls under 1-b (churches that reorganized around a
mission). He has considered taking this out.
But he keeps it in for 2 reasons.
1st. Principles that drive cell churches have things in common with emergent
churches. If excluded, people would ask why it wasn’t included.
2nd. First time in UK, conference for people planting cell churches from scratch.
Features of cell church model fit in with postmodern and
postchristian cultures
1st. Network of small groups, rather than an institution
2nd. Dialogue and participation
3rd. Some specialize in particular cultures
Concern
Some feel very top-down and hierarchical. Will British culture adapt to this?
It seems to work better in hierarchical society.
May be like herding cats.
Apply principles, without taking the whole system.
G12 is so new in the UK that we’ll need to wait and see.
What do we need to be to be church?
How can we simplify it to the minimum in a society where people are very busy?
Seems to fit best in community-based, domestic-based, group-based.
Danger: He knows of 2 churches who took this journey and deconstructed themselves out of existed.
G-12 cell church developed in Columbia, while traditional cell churches began in Singapore, Korea, and the U.S.
Traditional: When it hits a certain size, the cell divides
G-12: Each member of original group develops their own group. One group has
the chance to start 12 other groups. Exponential growth potential. 12 is an
important number. G stands for “government.” 12 tribes of Israel.
Led to explosive growth in Bogotá and other parts of Columbia. One of
London’s largest churches is adopting this model.
Worldwide movement, but takes different forms in different cultures.
Home church/household church are much less organized than the cell churches. A home church may be a single cell. Not much different between home church and household church. It has to do with size and the way that they replicate. A home church may not replicate. A household church may be a small network of households who relate to each other, but not in the same way as cell churches.
Base church is similar in structure, but draws upon a different tradition. Tends to come out of a Catholic and liberation theology background. Less defined boundaries between church and community.
Big issue within emerging church movement. Some leaders have theological training, but the majority aren’t trained. Because of isolation, most don’t have contact outside of their group. This May lead them to go nowhere. However, many are instinctively reflective, read widely. But there are just a few of us trying to network within them and reflect theologically.
Raises questions about theological training. If this is part of the future, what kind of leaders? What kind of training to they need? In cell churches, the roles of leaders change? If your main joy is preaching or leading corporate worship, you find yourself discontented and disabled in how you spend your time.
4-5 November 2003 conference on cell groups in Grenoble
In presenting this material 3-4 weeks ago to a group of denominational leaders in the UK, one question asked was is the emerging church scene only something from the evangelical charismatic church. Struggle to answer this question. Not entirely, but most examples involve post-evangelicals and post-charismatics. Some were heavily involved in post-evangelical charismatic churches. But many are the children of those involved in the early charismatic movement. There was an expectation that the children who grew up on the charismatic movement wouldn’t have to go through the same struggles that their parents went through. But the reality is that many of their children are bored with charismatic churches as their parents were previously with traditional churches. The move hasn’t been radical enough for their children. 2nd generation issues being worked out.
Theology of this. For many in the emerging churches, the
questions carried are different from those previously raised. But they don’t
have the same theological resources that their parents had. Many of the parents
were brought up on good theological reading and training, but which they rejected
saying that they didn’t need them. This has left the next generation severely
underresourced and asking a different set of questions:
Justice
Patriarchy
Racism
Models of leadership
Environment
They don’t want to go back to what their parents left, but to go back to something further. Take something ancient and combine it with something postmodern. Many would express gratitude for the starting point, but they want to go further.
Problem for those leading the “new churches.”
Where do you go after “new?”
The angry young radicals of the 1970s who were going to turn the world and church
upside down are now accused of being establishment figures. Recommend church
planters that the most important theological and sociological book to read is
George Orwell’s Animal Farm. When the revolution is finished, the same
system is still in place, but there are new people running it and it is more
oppressive than it was before.
Accusation raised the most against this movement. By having churches for different groups is a consumer mentality. Those involved will respond in different ways to the challenge.
Some will say YES. What’s wrong with that? Most Christians operate in a consumer mentality in most ways. Why not in the church? Becoming culturally sensitive
Some say NO. We are trying to change the culture from the interior. Subvert culture by getting involved in the nitty gritty of it.
Tension being culturally attuned and counter cultural.
His growing conviction is that you have to start by being culturally attuned, especially with those who are culturally far from Christianity. It may not be that until many years later that there is sufficient knowledge of the culture in order to change the culture. It is better for those in the culture to raise the questions themselves.
We need to identify with this culture first, then we’ll be involved in changing it in the future.
Right response, but with dangers. Will we ever reach the point of challenging the culture.
The danger is that if one starts by being counter-cultural, you end up being odd. There are many odd churches around. They aren’t counter-cultural, but on a different planet.
In terms of style, we’ll be culturally sensitive. But the content will be counter-cultural. Be a “safe place for a dangerous message” à la Willowcreek.
I’m not sure that I want to preface what I have to say by, “God has said to me.” I am fairly convinced that what is happening with the emerging church has the fingerprints on God on it. I don’t put all my hope in the emerging church nor discount the inherited church form.
Theological believe that God works on the margins. From reading the Bible story and seeing where God breaks in from the margins. From own personal journey to identify with the Anabaptist tradition. Sociologically, most things start on the margin.
Desire to be a resource for these emerging communities and help them reflect culturally and theologically on what they are doing. This involves some personal involvement, particularly with the table church model. Be bridge between emerging church and inherited church.
Bible text resonating with him for 5-6 years. First half of Acts 11. Peter returning from Cornelius’ house to Jerusalem. Must be important because Luke tells the story twice (chapters 10 and 11, from Peter’s perspective). Jerusalem church criticizes Peter for eating in a Gentile home.
A model equivalent would be an Iraqi evangelism eating with Donald Rumsfeld in the Pentagon. It is that great a clash of cultures.
You can tell Peter is in trouble because he keeps speaking about God. The church listens and tries to understand what is happening. Problem is that the church knows what Peter is like. One day he can have a revelation from God, but 5 minutes later he has a different response toward Jesus. Can be a visionary pioneer or a plunker.
Story of a church that does well. It has questions and concerns. However, if what Peter is saying is right, their church will never be the same again. They are prepared to take the risk. Having heard Peter’s report, they say that God has granted even to Gentiles the repentance that leads to life. Enlarged boundaries.
We need pioneers like Peter and churches like the Jerusalem church and a partnership between the 2.
What energizes him the most is to try to make connections between the inherited church and the emerging church. Neither is sufficient with the other.
Without the Emergent Church, the Inherited Church is in
danger of stagnation.
The Emergent Church needs the resources of the Inherited Church.
Desire to see partnerships develop.
Release pioneers & support them.
Hold them accountable.
Pioneers should keep pioneering, but keep returning to Jerusalem and listed
to the questions that Jerusalem asks.
Discipleship in the emerging church
In some, the pattern of teaching is fairly traditional.
Monolog sermon.
In a number, there is experimenting of different forms of learning together.
Dialog, rather than monolog.
Expects God to speak through a variety of people, rather than through one person.
Importance of theological reflection.
Start with life and then moving to text, rather than vice versa.
Recognition that discipleship grows out of real community, rather than just
listening to sermons.
Peer mentoring.
Allergic to hierarchical leadership.
Expectation that we learn together and build strong & integrated relationships.
Discipleship needs to be holistic.
Greater engagement with issues of justice, politics, environment, social questions
than the churches that they know.
Mixed response
Some operate in cultures where these words are understood. But find ways to challenge meanings of words and their implications.
But for outward looking groups, use of film. Themes of doubt, shame, hope, redemption. Recognizing that the story of Jesus isn’t know, use of stories that are known.
Engel, James F., and William A. Dyrness. Changing the Mind of Missions: Where Have We Gone Wrong? (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000).
Ford, Kevin Graham, and Jim Denney. Jesus for a New Generation: Putting the Gospel in the Language of Xers. (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1995).
Gibbs, Eddie. ChurchNext: Quantum Changes in How We Do Ministry. (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000).
Green, Michael. Evangelism in the Early Church. (Guildford, Surrey: Eagle, 1970).
Grentz, Stanley. A Primer on Postmodernism. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996).
Hunter, George G. III. The Celtic Way of Evangelism: How Christianity Can Reach the West...Again. (Nashville: Abingdon, 2000).
Jamieson, Alan. A Churchless Faith: Faith Journeys Beyond the Churches. (London: SPCK, 2002).
Jones, Tony. Postmodern Youth Ministry: Exploring Cultural Shift, Cultivating Authentic Community, and Creating Holistic Connections. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001).
McLaren, Brian. A New Kind of Christian: A Tale of Two Friends on a Spiritual Journey. (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001).
McLaren, Brian. The Church on the Other Side: Doing Ministry in the Postmodern Matrix. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000).
Morgenthaler, Sally. Worship Evangelism: Inviting Unbelievers into the Presence of God (Grand Rapid: Zondervan, 1999).
Newbiggen, Lesslie. Foolishness to the Greeks: The Gospel and Western Culture. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986).
Richardson, Rick. Evangelism Outside the Box: New Ways to Help People Experience the Good News (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000).
Stowell, Joseph M. The Trouble With Jesus. (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2003).
Sweet, Leonard. Soul Tsunami: Sink or Swim in the New Millenium Culture. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999).
Sweet, Leonard, Brian D. McLaren, and Jerry Haselmayer. A Is for Abductive: The Language of the Emerging Church. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003).
Webber, Robert E. Ancient-Future Faith: Rethinking Evangelicalism for a Postmodern World (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999).