One for the road...

Institutional Church - R.I.P..?

I am indebted to Fernando Gros' Being a missional gospel for the institutional church for the inspiration behind this post.  Fernando's post crystallised some of my thinking that has been influenced by a number of other emerging church esque posts that I have come across reacting against what has been labelled the institutional church, modern church, CEO/corporate church, and/or organised religion [I will refer to this as IC from now on].

In the emerging church I think, as I have advocated before, we need to apply the discipline of self examination to ourselves, critiquing ourselves and being critiqued.  It is with that in mind that I am writing what I envision will be a 3 part piece:

• Part 1 [below] will explore where I think as emergent christians we draw our reaction to the institutional church from and that maybe rather than adovocating the death of IC we should ask ourselves at the marco level are we really that different?
• Part 2 will  build on this and explore our commonality and shared heritage with with the IC and indeed with historically with all new forms of church; and
• Part 3 will explore the hand-me-up to the christian tradition that emerging church brings and how we can also benefit from the handed down traditions and pratices of the church.

An institutional death wish?

Why do we want the institutional church to die?  Ok, maybe we don't come right out and say that we really want it to die [although some people openly do], we'd like it to live, really we would,  but if it did go terminal well wouldn't we shed many tears over it? Would I? Would you?

But what do we mean by the institutional church?  What thoughts, images, feelings spring to mind?

Do we mean a  specific church that we know, maybe one we grew up in..? 

Maybe we mean a certain type of church with a particular style that never clicked for us, liturgy or angry sermons..?

Maybe it's broader than just a type of church or a particular strand but a reaction to a whole theological position -  maybe it's all that  evangelical rules base straight lacedness..? 

Maybe we just never got to ask questions or share doubts without feeling heretical - so a reaction to modernity as we find ourselves swimming in post-modern individualistic do what you want your way world..? 

Maybe its just any church, ever, full stop!  Burnt out or bummed out by how we have been treated by christians.  We can echo the words of Danny Archer, from the film Blood Diamond, but instead of Africa we are talking about our church experience:

"Sometimes I wonder... will God ever forgive us for what we've done to each other? Then I look around and I realise... God left this place a long time ago. "

I think however we define IC it will have a large element of personal experience and a reaction against that.  I speculate here but I think many people in the emerging church have a lot of that experience in common and thus have a broad common reaction where we can define what we are not by that which we have personally experienced and do not like/agree with etc.

Reactions speak louder than words

I am not trying to minimise anyone's pain or argue that there is is anything inherently bad about the origins of the emerging church coming out of the IC.  I think it is hopeful and encouraging that rather giving up on God and being a community that gathers, the emerging church are trying to find ways of still embodying that.  I do think we need to own our baggage and be clear that in the many ways how we are constructing our ecclesiology is based on a reaction to what we have encountered and experienced. 

The ongoing excellent serious the The People Formerly Known As is to my mind a very therapeutic example of this reaction, giving people a framework to react against what they have experienced in the IC.  In many ways the TPFKA is a coalition of the damaged, the disappointed and the downright disillusioned who like white blood cells are prepared to fight off the life killing experiences of the IC and purge it from the body to which they can see it having no beneficial part.

But what are we specifically reacting against?

Institutional madness?

"All national institutions of churches...appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolise power and profit."

So wrote Thomas Paine in 1794 showing that the fear of the institution, the modern machine, the power hungry juggernaut of programmes and products that crushes people is nothing new and not a recent invention of the Wachowski brothers - although they exploited this fear in the Matrix. 

Our reaction against the institution is seen in metaphors such as organic, an emphasis on the communal or a focus on less structure more free flowing forms of liquid church.  Whilst we may fear the term institution we need to look at what underlies this?  As Brian McLaren points out in A New Kind of Christian do we really not like organised religion so that we are advocating a disorganised irreligion?  Or are we voicing concerns about how the religion has been organised and practised such that the fruit we experience seems false or hypocritical with words not matching up with actions?

Then again do we need to take a reality check - do any of us ever fully live up to our professions or our intentions?  Are we just in danger here of expressing dislike for one form of institution only to be guilty of the same practises ourselves? 

Maybe worse are we in danger of loosing something where we become deliberately disorganised or de-institutionalised whilst still bearing all the marks of an institution?  Or if eschew structure for a claim of every space being sacred and church present do we risk actually having nothing, a liquid that has nothing to contain it flows away, do we so want to end up soaked into our culture that we become indistinguishable from it?

Ligaments rather than liquid institutions?

Perhaps we need to get past our fears and admit that even our new forms of churches are institutions - ones, like those that have gone before, that are trying to be shaped by a different rhythm and practise to the other institutions of our age? Where sacrament and the sacred exist and our shared across a common history? 

Without getting too idealistic maybe it would be helpful as McLaren suggests we need to consider religion in terms of its Latin roots -  around reconnection.  Institutions that are about reconnecting us to God and each other - binding us together? Religious institutions that are ligaments rather than liquid? 

Whilst some stretch and flexibility is needed within the ligament, which can play out in the need for churches to adapt to the conditions we find ourselves too much stretch of the ligament is ultimately damaging and leads to instability. 

Not wanting to stretch this metaphor much further I still think we should recognise that the institutional church across the age is connected to each other and to try and tear or sever that link would be to impair our own being and interaction.  Whilst we may wish to deny our institutional nature I wonder how effective we can be as churches if we do not remain as such - yes that brings with it a tension, how to be an institution without being impersonal but it is not something that we can deny.

In search of the perfect church?

We can also react against our experience of church and use that reaction to create churches that are different by eradicating all the experiences that we disliked. 

When I got married my father-in-law gave a great speech part of which was about how his first born beautiful daughter did not come with an instruction manual and no way of putting her back.  In facing how to be a parent he admitted that their was a choice of either doing what their parents had done because they liked it as children or doing the total opposite because they disliked it growing up.   In the same way we can get all idealistic about church, our constructions are reaction to our modern IC parent that we didn't like so we will do the opposite - does that make our form better? Maybe for us but not universally so?  Does it mean that the IC that we come from is dying because it didn't work for us - probably not!

Creating blueprint churches are not going to lead us to better churches, just different ones.  We need recognise that the church is an institution that is full of failed people who are struggling together as well as a beautiful bride loved by Christ.  We are the good, the bad and the ugly all mixed in together and any form of gathering we have will display these attributes.  To quote from the song everyone is free to wear sunscreen

"Accept certain inalienable truths, prices will rise, politicians will
philander, you too will get old, and when you do you’ll fantasise
that when you were young prices were reasonable, politicians were
noble and children respected their elders... Respect your elders."

We may want to reverse that process and see the IC as corrupt and broken and our new forms of church as free from this stain but this kind of inverse nostalgia is only that.

More so we may dislike certain practises of the IC but we need to ask ourselves where we draw our own models from?  For example we may react to the CEO model of doing church, a top down tight command and control model as being just an accommodation to business driven structures.  But in advocating team based, creative, open, flat structures are we advocating anything different from the current models advocated by current business practitioners?  Or we may dislike the consumer driven mentality, the McChurch model and instead find ourselves advocating a more niche, independent coffee shop esque structure - both of which models are drawn from the consumer market place - just reflect differing consumer preferences of our own.

In fact I go as far as to ask myself how much of the emerging church is a me-centric driven experience rich process - we may abandon attractional models but are we instead seeking to have God experiences in a church that we want to go to, filled with people who we would want to hang out with, who think and talk the same way we do? A place of people like us who we like rather than a people like them who we don't?

Christianity is churchianity?

How much do our churches provide us as places to detox from the consumer culture me centric around us and to reconnect to the counter culture of christianity? 

Do we ever stop to think that without the church there would be no christians?

That the practise of gathering together in small groups with whom we do/share life with and bigger groups to share and declare ourselves in God's story rather than God in ours, is a practise of the church since its inception right up till now?

We may choose to wish to disassociate ourselves from people who we see as being about church and rather position ourselves as people who are about the kingdom of god but in doing so we cannot dismiss the fact that the church, the body, the gathering, the community is the means where we express and embody this.  An understanding of the other centred tri-une God models for us how we are individually created but it is in other centred community that we learn character and find our purpose and affirm the purposes of others.

We may advocate that church should be modelled so that we can belong before we believe but if we do not create a separate space from our culture are we not in danger of allowing people to continue to belong in other things (even in part)?

Let's be realistic about this in our awareness - it is clear to me that I belong to many other things other than the church - whilst it suits my consumer mindset to reduce my ownership to just me and God or me and people is it to, quote Jesus, any different from what anyone one else in the world does? 

What distinguishes christianity? For Jesus it is the love that such a diverse and individual group of people show each other when they are gathered in their churchianity- which to the world looks like insanity!  That is because in our world as we know such diversity and individuality leads to selfish grabs at happiness at the expense of others.  Of course some of that still happens in church - we are after all detoxing, we are still consumer addicts and likely to fall off the waggon and back to our back stabbing ways at the slightest hint of personal happiness and fulfilment where our needs will get met on some else's expense tab!

Where are we going to learn the practises and models that will help us detox from culture and at the same time transform it - are they not within our common heritage and history as a church?  The emphasis on spiritual practises and disciplines are not new inventions but date back to when the tri-une God first called a people to be their image bearers.  We must be careful not to strip mine church history for experiences that we can exploit for ourselves  to connect to God whilst damming the IC that has used them for centuries.  Instead we must set these practises in their context, aware of the dangers that to do other wise of a form of pastiche or nostalgic church.

The same goes for the reality of  of counter cultural veiled practises, ones that are not available to be consumed/bought such as communion and baptism.  These are rites and rituals that are again shared across history and church form. 

Your thoughts?

I have painted with a broad brush because I want to show that our in our reaction to the IC we still have as many if different inconsistencies and double standards.  I have also painted myself into the picture my critique as someone who enjoys, appreciates and benefits from the emerging church conversation.  I value your thoughts/feelings, particularly:

• what do you agree with?
• what do you disagree with?
• how would you paint the picture?
• where would you paint yourself in it?

A new reformation/rediscovery of Divine imagination - christians as the artistically expressive community of the book...

Do you read the bible? If you do, how do you read it - in the way you've always done or in a variety of ways/settings?  What pose do you strike - disecting? fact finding? evidence to support a case? evaluating? flirting? exploring? rose tinted wish it was like that today glasses? How often do I let the bible read me? 

I think i am changing from a book that i have to read and analyse to a book that i can form a relationship with and that invites me to find different ways of both pursuing it and being pursued - that there is an active involved communal relation seeking God who is behind the words, revealed in the words and is breathes in and through them...

I also ask cos there is a small group of us trying to explore different ways of reading the bible, particualarly as a community of the book who wants to practice what we discover.  I am thinking about what I can lead our group into exploring and came across this great article about learning to read the bible again.   I found the following quote on recapturing the divine imaginagion of God in our bible reading one that really impacted me...

"...the good news in recognizing scriptural interpretation as an art is that reading scripture, like other forms of art, has the potential for creating something beautiful. Interpretations of scripture are not just right or wrong, although at times such categories are useful and necessary. A more adequate way of judging our readings might be the way we judge works of art -- according to the standards of beauty. To what extent do our readings reveal the intricacy, the wondrous quality of what the biblical writers call ma’asei Adonai, "the works of the LORD"? To what extent do they draw us toward something, a way of being that is -- to use Paul’s language -- more "lovely," more "gracious," more "excellent," "noble," "worthy of praise" (Phil. 4:8)?

Our readings will produce such beauty precisely to the extent that they respond faithfully to the antecedent imaginative power of God, to which the Bible bears witness. We normally say that God relates to us through God’s power of love, of compassion and so on -- and of course that is true. But if imagination is the capacity to envision the existence of something that does not yet exist -- the clearest instance of this being the artistic imagination -- then it makes sense to speak also of the divine imagination.

The creation of the world, the covenant between the Creator of heaven and earth and an old man named Abraham, the formation of a nation of priests out of a band of runaway slaves, the incarnation of the Godhead in human flesh, the destruction of death’s finality the inclusion of the gentiles in God’s covenant with Israel -- all these and more are remarkably imaginative acts on God’s part, acts through which God envisions and effects something totally new, totally unimaginable before it was brought into being. If we are faithful readers of the stories of these imaginative acts, we will find our own imaginations expanded and transformed. Thus scripture claims us and gradually forms us into a new people.

If reading scripture is an art, there follows one more conclusion: we learn the practice of an art through apprenticeship to those who have become masters. We come to read scripture imaginatively and well only by learning from those who have gone before us and performed, in their lives of embodied faithfulness, beautiful interpretations of scripture..."

I find this whole idea captures my imagination, not least because the last para in particular connects with some of my thoughts about deep church. 

Some qestions stirring in me...

How do you feel about reading the bible as an artistic expression?

If it is about us participating as communities caught up in the passionately creative imagination of God then how do you think we could...

• practice this together in our faith communities - what do you think it would look/feel like for you or even if you have experienced it?
• become not just students but artists, not just readers but creators?
• become creative/imaginative change agents rather than agents of preservation?

And who for you:

• is a master artist who inspires you and fires your creative God connecting life transforming imagination?

Restoring my humanity: personal experiences of Jesus as the way/truth/life...

Yesterday I reflected on some of my thinking why Jesus is the way not only for me to find God but also to become fully human.  Today I'd like to explore that by looking at some of my life and  how for me Jesus has helped me become not just more human but a better human in terms of my work, marriage, my sexuality etc...

My way or Jesus way?

The way of Jesus for instance was the way of self sacrifice and death, through torture.  Watch Mel Gibson’s The Passion and it all comes home in glory/gory filled technicolour.  To see someone die with such dignity and compassion in the face of such suffering and injustice is a calling to aspire high above my immediate life goals/desire for a way of gadgets, gizmos and carefully collected knowledge. 

It is a way that I have often wandered off as well.  The low point of this journey came just over 6 years ago. 

I had gone through a patch of being wildly successful at work, given increased responsibilities for key clients and a higher wage packet I plunged myself into work, dreaming of the day when I would become a partner in the firm of auditors for which I worked.  Long hours and such dreams of more success and money kept me feeling happy and content and my need for following the way of God faded.  I was doing this myself and reaping all the benefits of such.  Forget the wild ways, the hidden valley, the exposed windy hillside – I was down in big green lush fields where I would live my days in gratifying and enjoying the desires of my heart. 

Over night it all began to go sour. 

I got a new boss who didn’t like me.  I got dumped on with more and more responsibility; previously it had felt liberating, now I was hopelessly out of my depth and drowning.  My staff failed to get their work done.  My clients complained and circulated emails and memos out of context.  I was warned, failure would not be tolerated.  So I of course redoubled and trebled my efforts, worked longer hours, made bigger promises, tried to bluff that I was thriving under this pressure instead of being crushed.
For awhile it looked even sweeter.  Off my own back I organised a transfer to the Boston office subject to the approval of my bosses, I dreamed of new experiences and of course returning higher up the ladder and work seemed to be going good again. 

Then it all fell apart. 

Staff shortages had led to a poorer piece of work but the new boss wasn’t interested in excuses my manager and then my boss both phoned me up at a client to tear a strip off me.  After my manager’s call I was shaken, retreating to the toilet I started to cry, I had tried so hard and it was so unfair, pulling myself together I returned back to my desk to put a brave face on it.  I still had some dregs of self confidence left, I had demonstrated bounce back ability before, and I would do so again.  Then the phone rang again, it was the boss.  Nothing I could say could satisfy him, he had written me off, it was clear by his tone, his comments.  My thin wisp of self belief snapped along with something inside me, the stress, the pressure, the end of all my hopes, the dreams becoming a nightmare and I started sobbing into the phone.  All I kept saying between wracking sobs was “I tried, I tried so hard…”  The boss told me to call me back after I pulled myself together and hung up.  Leaving me to sob it out and to leave work that night a broken man.  No move to Boston, future in the firm, it was all clear to me that I would have to move on…

The way I had chosen had looked like leading to success but instead had shown me failure.  Humbly with no where else to turn or anything else to cling to I began to return to the way of God, haltingly, honestly, scared of rejection I began to read little snippets of the bible, to pray and to wonder what the future might now hold for me.  I didn’t feel at all comfortable out on the lonely path but at least I had something of a map and compass…

Looking back the humbling of me was also the making of me.  Going back was going forward.  I was vulnerable and in a place where God could find me, guide me, change me, take me on… And of course then there was truth…

Before my sense of pride, my goals, my ambitions, my fears and my insecurities had kept me blind from the truth of who I was, what I was like, why I was like it.  Now vulnerable I could begin to face some of the truth about my character, my nature but it would also take something more.  It would take someone modelling the power of honesty and in turn giving me the courage to be honest as well and it would take a dramatic intervention by God to show me the truth.

There's truth and then there is The Truth...

I have already blogged a little about my encounters with truth and deeper truth and the strugle to be honest about my sexuality here.

It was on a mission trip to Zambia when the radical encounter with truth which has lasted for the last 4.5 yrs began.  I think I had signed up for the trip in my heady days of success but by the time I departed I was wondering exactly what the point of me being there was... 

An exclusive inclusive Christ - is Jesus really the only way to God?

Is the christrian exclusive claim that Jesus is the only way to God an arrogant monopoly that is outdated in these inclusive and tolerant times?  Do not all religions lead to God?  Why then do we need to worry about Jesus then - is it just another sign of a power hungry, oppressive religion that can brook no competition enforced by arrogant believers who think their way is better than everyone else?   Christian who through out history has imposed on people for the 'greater good' this need to believe in Jesus, sadly  often by using the threat of violence, fear and intimidation whether in this life or in the after one, or both?

In chapter 8 of a New Kind of Christian, Brian McLaren discusses other religions,  the character Neo says:

"Dan, when it comes to other religions, the challenge of modernity was to prove that we're right [christians] and they're wrong.  But I think we have a different challenge in postmodernity.  The question isn't so much whether we're right but whether we're good.  And it strikes me that goodness not rightnes, is what Jesus said the real issue was - you know, good trees produce good fruit.  If we christians would take all our energy we put into proving we're right and others are wrong and invested that in pursuing and doing good, somehow I think more people would believe we are right...

...I believe that he [Jesus] is truly the way, that if we believe in him and follow him, he will bring us to the Father.  Too often when we quote the verse about him being the way, it sounds like we're saying he's in the way - as if people are trying to come to God and Jesus is blocking the path, saying 'oh no, you don't! You have to get by me first.' I really don't think that's what he meant when he said he was the way...

...I really believe he is the truth. He is reality; he is authentic; he is genuine and real and not fake or false in any way.  And I really believe he is the life, that fullness of life is in him.  And I really believe that not one person will be in real contact with God the Father apart from the work, wisdom and love of Jesus.  If I didn't believe that, I don't think i could call myself a christian..."  p61 & p65

In other words christians often seem to portray all these religions as wrong, they cast doubt on whether they are seeking God unless they get a stamp from Jesus – he is the divine bouncer and we christians have become his heavy handed enforcers who if Jesus doesn’t have our name on his checklist then neither you are and I are not coming in!

I think it would be the ultimate act of hypocrisy if this image of Jesus is true – after all his fiercest criticism was aimed at the religious authorities of the day who were doing precisely that – in their bid for a sin free society they were doing so by firmly labelling people as insiders or outsiders – they defined if you were in or out.  Jesus modus operandi didn’t seem to be about trying to sweep sinners out of sight under the carpet of society/social conformity but instead offering them the opportunity to rethink how they were doing their life and to swap it instead for the life he had to offer, a life lived in the radical revolutionary redemptive reconciling kingdom of God.

If Jesus is not acting as a roadblock to God is there another way then that we can understand his words?  Not as a barrier but as door of opportunity, not as a limiter but as an unparallelled open invitation? 

In the rest of this post i'd like to explore a way of trying to understand Jesus claim to be the way/truth/life in a way that views him as helping us as spirtual beings recover/express our full humanity rather than barring us from the divine.  I'd then like to do a follow up post on this tomorrow where by I expand in my own life of my own struggles in following Jesus and how his way/truth/life have been well life changing for me....

why are you bovvered to be a christian... [part 2]

I just wanted to say thank you for the brilliant thougths being shared by people on my recent post: why are you bothered to be a christian exploring faith/mission/evangelism in a culture which is increasingly 'not bothered.'

I rasied the same issue here on Jason Clark's blog and included the following clip from English commedian Catherine Tate to illustrate:

Ari has also highlighted a really great looking sermon which explores finding God in the other and she follows it up with some awesome reflections on Christianity and love. Similarly this site advocating a new progressive alliance between people of faith [either in God or no God] seems to be a great opportunity to learn from each other rather than take a position of i'm right/you're wrong...

One of the most interesting/profound things i took from watching the TV programme ‘God is green’ that i blogged about, was how many religions have something at the heart of their sacred texts about caring for the planet - it was fascinating seeing this christian presenter interviewing hindus and muslims as well as evengelical american christians and exploring not just what the bible says but what their own faith teachings said…

I found that quite humbling in that often we look to overthrow a different faith, prove it wrong etc but this was an insight in how to view/engage/explore what all religions could do if they took these texts seriously…

new kinds and old kinds of christan... revisited!

One of the fun things I get to do is help Jason Clark look after his blog.  I like to liken it to guest services, making sure that the variety of guest writers who have volunteered to write are looked after as well as looking to develop the content of the site.  One of the guests could not post yesterday so I covered by posting this recent piece on why I am growing to value and appreciate and value all kinds of christian, but especially the old kind on Jason's site.  You can see it here [apparently this boosts the technorati links for Jase and for me as a spin off!].

A question of engagement

I also have a Q for you on engagement with the audience that reads blogs.  One of the things that Jason and I would like to do is to increase the number of readers who interact on his blog so I'd love to hear your ideas on:

• what makes you want to leave a comment on a blog?
• what doesn't make you want to leave a comment?
• any blogs you read which have a high number of commentators?
• any ways you can think which might help engage people to leave a comment?

looking forward to hearing your thoughts...

why do you bother being a christian (if you are one)? What difference does all the bothering make to you? Are you bothered about the people who aren't bothered?

Why are you bothered being a christian?

Are  you bothered that nearly 2/3 of the current world's population [cf some 4bn] are not christians - in traditional christian thinking that is an aweful lot of people who aren't going to heaven. 

Recent methods by those who are bothered to try and change these numbers often seem to me to presupose christianity is right and everyone else is wrong, we have the truth and you need to listen [a very much them and us mentality] - in other words if you knew more [Alpha] or were scared more [where are you going when you die] more pople would become christians?  Do you think that is fair? Does that matter? Does that bother you?  How else could we, as christians, behave/act/communicate?

I'm thinking about this whole subject of why would anyone be bothered to follow Jesus and therefore be bothered for anyone else to - or in old money should we bother about evangelism and other religions/beliefs/faiths.  To help me in my thinking I'd really love your help please in answering 3 simple Qs.  I'm interested in your experiences about...

1. why are you bothered to be a christian, or why are you not bothered?
2. If you are a christian what does that mean to you [what difference does it make, some recent examples would be great, etc]?  And
3. What do you do as a christian to make anyone else want to be one [NB: not what you think should be done or what you would like to do]?  If you're not a christian what advice would you give here? [practical examples would be great!]...

There are no right or wrong answers.  This isn't a test.  What ever you think/feel in response to these Qs would be great and I'd love to hear your honest view[s]...

Thank you very much!  i'll play to and leave my answers in the comments section...

Is the consideration that I might be wrong the new right? or why christians like me shouldn't find [on-going] humility such a surprising revelation...

Christians should find it easy to consider/acknowledge or even go as far as admit that they might be wrong - was the thought that I had this morning.  Swiftly followed by the question: 'ok so why do I find it so hard then?'

I was wrong once [upon a time]...

What do I mean - well I was thinking that the most natural entry point in entering the kingdom of God is the one where we repent, or re-think how we are doing life and come to a crisis of realisation that maybe we are not doing so well - heading the wrong way down the right road as Jason described it in his talk yesterday.

Now however that has been framed in the decision making process is not really the point - the point is at some point I made a decision to follow Jesus - or to put it crudely i said ok my kingdom is pretty crap, small, crowded squalid place where i reign and i've heard/read/felt/experienced something different Jesus which seems to be your Kingdom and therefore I abdicate my throne and my kingdom and instead want to join/be part of/live in your kingdom.

I admitted i was wrong/limited/shallow/oppressed/selfish/arrogant/greedy/cruel/unkind and consumeristic and more than that i participated in a confederation of kingdoms called 'society/culture' where we shared all these things in common - we had a simple constitution which said...

We each have the right to do whatever we want that makes us happy as long as it doesn't mess too much with our individual happiness [and even then it will limited by our historical understanding of protecting my rights to health/wealth/possession].  With that caveat I won't tell you how to live your life and you don't tell me how to live yours...

Your kingdom come - but i'll take the franchise option of my will still being done!

But here is the nub, I wonder after making that initial confession that I was wrong and deciding that I needed God whether I just changed the name on the outside but fell straight back into my old practices - instead of one form of cultural acknowledgement i now had another, instead of moving into God's kingdom I set up shop on the border and took the best of God - he will look after me, sort things out for me, keep me safe, healthy, wealthy, problem free whilst continuing to have the best of my life before - it's about me and my happiness.

Yes of course this living still required pay offs, compromises and becoming fluent in two forms of language/lifestyle and if anyone asked of course i was fully in - look i bashed the minorities who christians were supposed to bash, i had made my confession, i tried to twist a few arms of people to join me but in reality it was still my kingdom, loosely affiliated to God's, mainly in name only.

In my kingdom i drifted away from that original thought that maybe i was wrong, maybe i needed to continue the process of rethinking, repenting, reconsidering and instead I became about being right in my new affiliation - I found a nice comfortable place of doing what i wanted and any challenge to that was met by the reaction:  'who the hell are you to tell me how to live my life, what I should believe and how i should live that belief!'

Over recent years experience has shown me that I have been wrong about many things - that I my own actions are so often rooted in my own insecurity and addictions, my selfish need and more than that i participate in a faith whose systems inherently reinforce that...

I have come back to the point where I started from which is that I am often as wrong about being a christian as I was as about being a secular member of society - i have made both experiences about me and my needs, about doing things that make me happy with a veneer of respectability of doing so in the name of God...

So I wonder....

... if instead of insisting on my own rightness i became open to consider that maybe i was at best only partly right?  I wonder if i continued to rethink/repent in my life whether i would be open to letting it be about how i acted in my marriage, at work, who i voted for, what i wore, how i played, who i hang out with, how i care for the communities i am part of including this planet? 

...whether that ongoing consideration that I have a tendency to get things wrong would help me be less insistent that MY way was the right way - whether that was my way of doing church or anything else?

...if being more humble would make me more open to advice about how to live my life, would make me more open to sharing who I am rather than who I think I should be, make me transparent as to the pain/selfishness/addiction/stress/tension/hang ups that I have and need help with but also make me more loving in reaching out to people with their own issues/stresses - to care for them as people made in God's image rather than as projects to shape into that of my own and assimilate into my kingdom [so i feel better/smugger/more righteous about being me]?

...that being wrong is an opportunity to be a work in progress rather than have to feel i am a finished article?  That life is about learning, seeking, searching for God and he is about finding me in growing depth and transformation?

...that i might have not have all the answers, or even all the questions makes me wonder if rather than seeking to enforce a particular practise/way i should be more open, supportive, encouraging of people who are different to me?  To what end am I right is less important to the Q is this helping someone find/connect/express their faith in Jesus in practise rather than per my own preferences/experience/choices?  Is polarity - i'm right/you're wrong a concept that should be on the way out and instead maybe something that says where are you right, where can i learn from you?

...what the impact of reflecting on whether we are still  being wrong would mean to our gatherings/structures/systems as a faith, how could we change them and how could they help us to be more humble, open, God seeking?

...that being open to being wrong by myself and my tendency to self determine in favour of me is not an invitation to seek to participate in a community? to encourage confession?  to support accountability?  To seek to make my life not so much about just me but to encourage me to open up to others, to seek to love and care for people and in return to do the same for me - so that we can challenge each other and ask the Q how are we living life?  Are we living out what we believe? More are we living out the practise of life, the marks that Jesus suggests that we should? And encourage, love, support and spur another on to do so?

...any more that you can think of/would like to add for you?

Why I am growing to appreciate and value all kinds of christian - but especially the old kind...

One of the tensions that i feel when i participate in conversations with those who identify ourselves with the emerging church is a sense of frustration with the church that people seem to feel.  I know myself that I have experienced similar frustration and anger with what we, when being polite, may term the modern church, the established church, the traditional church, sometimes with additional adjectives such as conservative, evangelical, fundamental, liberal etc...

I say it is a tension as over the last few years I have come to feel that frustration and anger is not always helpful, not least because it leaves me:

• making generalisations [sweeping and otherwise];
• labelling and judging people;
• feeling that i am right and others are wrong;
• increases my indulgence in resentment/bitterness/moaning; and
• feeling negative about the whole idea of church and increasing my consumeristic tendencies

In short all the things that I thought were bad about the church I am equally as guilty of and no doubt even more self righteous about!

Exploring the spiritual discipline of frustration

I have come to realise that frustration is not always such a bad thing, particularly if frustration is a motivation that leads me to:

• motivating decision making,
• self evaluation/judging,
• growing aware of/addressing character weaknesses,
• practically helping people,
• seeking opportunities for conversation,
• seeking to pray for, love and understand people [where they are] more than I am loved and understood myself. 

I am not saying that this is an easy process, for example, whilst still serving in my last church,  I still wanted to be connected but I stepped down from a lot of leadership roles as I knew the temptation to use my position to undermine would be too much, far better to not give my anger and frustration that sort of platform.  Instead I sought to support people who were leading, to encourage them, to reach out to people who were dissatisfied and help them with their own anger.  I tried to channel my frustration into being the sort of Christian i thought i should be: practising generosity, honesty, love etc rather than insisting every one should do it the way that I thought it should be done 

For me it became a spiritual discipline.  I remember listening to sermons and rather than just being frustrated that the 'right words' weren't being said I instead sought to not wait for church to validate my version of christianity but to live it  instead.   When i disagreed with a talk instead of dismissing it I tried to think through the 'why' of that and to see that often the points being made were valid and that they, together with my own thoughts, often added a balance.  often it was a case of that language was different and I didn't like it - a matter of style rather than a disagreement with orthodoxy/substance.

Four thoughts on why I am learning to like and value all kinds but especially the ol' kinda christians...

I been spending the last few weeks thinking about why I value inclusivity rather than exclusivity  and the following are some thoughts about why I feel I should value all forms of christianity, whether they are old kinds of christian or a new kind...

1. Heritage

There is no getting away from it I owe a huge debt of gratitude to the conservative evangelical and charismatic traditions I have been part of.  It was these tradition that taught me so much about what it is to be a christian, e.g.:

• they gave me a love for encountering God in the bible and today;
• the foundation to think and ask questions about God, the world, purpose of life;
• the experience of being guided by the Holy Spirit, spiritual gifts, healings and other God inspired life transforming and enriching encounters;
• a fine understanding of orthodoxy; and
• a desire to love God in thought, action, experience and emotion... 

If it wasn't for the people of these traditions serving God as faithfully as they know how and with the best of intentions passing on their faith/expeeience/love to me than I doubt I would be writing about matters of faith at all.

It makes me think of that other most difficult and frustrating time of my physical life which was my teenage yrs and the struggle to find my identity as a person - seperate/independent yet still related/connected to my parents.  In the same way I see the struggle to find my 'spiritual identity' and to do so with a healthy relationship with my 'spiritual parents' is one that is equally hard a time of transition for both child and parent.  Understanding how hard it is for those 'parents' might make me more generous and kinder - it is not because they hate me and are out to frustrate me but becaause they love me and don't want to see me hurt, are uncertain about what will happen when they let go and even how fast to do so.  Questions of freedom, of maturity of respect matter immensely and one where I think i would find it healthier [and demonstrate these qualities] by following the advice of the bible on how to treat parents and seek to honour/appreciate my church family/heritage [even if they do frustrate me at times - and me them...] 

Note to self: blood is thicker than orthodoxy after all :)

2. Character

One of the recent thoughts I have had is that God is not concerned about making me happy - in the sense of how i see happiness [healthy, wealth, new 40 inch LCD tv, easy life etc] but is more interested in me developing a mature Christ-esque character.  This rthought coupled with my recent fave quote - that hanging out with people who i agree with, people who think the same as me, people who are like me makes a clique not a community - makes me appreciate the character growing process of experiencing all kinds of christians, especially the ones that I disagree with the most [at least in maters of style, expression etc].

In other words rather than belittling people for not getting me maybe instead I should invest time in trying to get them, to explain myself, to open myself up to critique rather than to seek to critique them. 

Maybe if I really believe in a generous orthodoxy I should start living that out by being generous to the conservative/modern [etc] parts of the church?

Perhaps if being a christian is about love and if Jesus said that the ultimate mark of the church would be the love that the people who followed him showed one another, then I should be more loving, more generous, kinder, softer, less angry and more hopeful?  Rather than shaking my head at their foolish/outmoded ways maybe I should consider whether my own life of faith is really better, or am I maybe better in some areas but far worse in others making me less overall?  [Why do I hear my mother saying - when you point with one finger, three fingers point back at you?]

What if God is serious about growing patience, love, kindness, mercy, grace, encouragement, passion, generosity, faith and self control [etc] in me - what better way than in/through/by encountering people who stretch me in all of these ways?  In trying to build relationships with people who I struggle with and seeking to live a life that is a blessing to them, that is about giving myself away rather than trying to get what I want from them?

And what better way then by exposing how when I try and do so I promptly fail because my reserves of love et al are remarkably low for any one else other than me?  Thus reminding me that this is not about what I can do but what God does in my weakness, not my strength - that his kingdom is a work of the Holy Spirit and therefore I need to seek God first - i need to ask God for the patience I need, for the love I need and keep asking him to grow me so I can love more because I am seeking to love more?

3. Deep church

I hinted at this above  - if I really believe in a generous orthodoxy should I not be equally generous with the modern church?  If I believe that it takes all sorts of different churches to reach all sorts of different people and that part of my call as a christian who is loved by Christ to love everyone, including those people who follow him as well - then maybe I should be asking different sort of Qs?:

What if it is not just about creating another stream of church but looking at opportunities to work together as different churches, where it is not so much my mission but our mission, where the people who are served by the church who don't care which church it is but love the fact that some one cares about them? 

A place where the huge amount that the church as a whole has in common is not overshadowed by the small differences of language, emphasis, style? 

A church where we look at the bigger picture, where we are cheered on by a great cloud of witnesses from all denominations and seek to encourage, support and look out for all christian here on earth? 

What do I need to do differently?  What aspects of negativity or polarity or kingdom building do I need to shelve in order to be more generous?  Not only should i ask myself what it costs but what price I am prepared to pay?  If being a follower of Jesus is about seeing his kingdom come and his will being done rather than my will/kingdom than maybe I need to trust Jesus more and me less with the answers?  What does it mean to seek the kingdom of God first in this context?  What does it mean to think about loving and appreciating all my christian cousins?  What does it mean to validate them as much [if not more] than I want to be validated myself?

4. Global conversation

Finally, I am conscious that a lot of what I feel is only applicable within my western cultural context, which is a post-church one - a lot of my frustration on style of church is pretty meaningless when people can't be bothered with church in the first place. 

We might live in the 'whatever' generation but for me I'd rather care enough to engage with church and participate with in it.  I have a deep love and appreciation for the church, yes it might lumber but at its best it is a body that is revolutionary.  For example its very essence is counter-cultural in its desire/expression to permeate the dominant cultural motiff of a life that is all about: 'me, who is important, my life to live how I like so don't judge,  and its myself first and others only if i can be bothered.'  Ironically such liberation needs to start at home as I am chronically addicted to such a cultural existence that if I can't consumer my out of a situation, if it requires commitment rather than a one off transaction, time rather than a flash of the credit card, serving rather than expecting service 24/7 then I struggle...

But more than my own cultural context there is a whole world in Africa and Asia where christianity is different again, where culture is different again - to assume that my issues are the normative would I think be grossly short sighted and further evidence of my own self love. 
In the context of a global conversation I need to think about how my actions impact on the world, issues like trade justice and the environment become not just causes to consume for but challenges for long term commitment that will cost me and my time and treasures...

And here comes the nub - Christ loves the church, we're that imperfect bride, we're not a super model, we're not a gold digger, we're not after a sugar daddy we're just average people trying to love him back.  All of us have are being revealed by Jesus - revealed to have beauty in ways we could not imagine, revealed to have a worth that we never thought we could possess, revealed to revel in a life that is beyond ourselves, that is not about getting what we can but giving ourselves away, giving ourselves up to him... and we get to that together, to see each other the way he sees us, to call out the God colours in each of us and to cheer each other down the aisle...

So next time...

I feel tempted to write the trad church this or the conservative church that... to rant at a grey monolith, to make a sweeping generalisation, to score an easy point, to poke fun at a person's or denominations blind spot or weakness I hope I will stop, reread and delete.  I hope I can be specific, i hope i can share experiences in a way that is both positive and real to how I feel.  I hope that instead of pointing the finger I can instead offer an embrace.  I hope that I can be honest, real, gracious and loving and extend all of that first without the expectation that it be extended back to me but with a undying hope that it will be. 

Instead of making it about them and us, maybe I'll make it just about me - or it that is too self centred - maybe just us.

Maybe... afterall the story doesn't end here and I still have a lot of growing and loving to do.  At least i don't have to do that alone...

The dust off their feet [oh and some more thoughts this time inspired by chapter 7 of a new kind of christian]...

One of my quieter new yrs resolutions is try and start to re-engage with the bible.  Just to read it, enjoy it, be shaped by it and yeah let it read me...  It was one the great things about when I read the whole of the new testament in The Message paraphrase, it was alive, vibrant and it actually changed me - certain parts of the sermon on the mount, ephesians [love is about giving not getting] and Galations [power of grace] just blew me away and left me changed as a result...

But of late I feel I have only engaged with the bible when I want something, when it is something to support what I am saying/thinking - like calling up an old friend cos i'm after a favour and not cos i want to reconnect and renew our friendship/relationship.

Of course part of my problem is that old one of familarity breeds... well in this case arrogance, which is why the Message with its paraphrase was so shockingly good - it actually meant i read, listened, reflected, bathed in the words and wondered at possibility of what they suggested - somewhere a hunger woke up...

The bible is not the sole foundation of christian life/experience and it is more than just an answer book - infact when i go looking for answers i usually find i have already determined the answer when i let the bible read me i tend to find it throws up a whole lot of Qs about me and my life/experience.   It's an interesting dynamic that I am inspired/informed by christians, by theology, by experience and community and the bible - but the bible in turn inspires all these things... it awakens hunger for the things of God.

But with all hungers it dampened down, my life got different rythm, space got compacted and i went back to resting on bible laurels, don't read me i'll read you...

But now I'm back - i look at the morass on the inside of me and think yes I need God to be searching me, transforming me, shaping me - I need something to help me encounter God more, to inspire me,to challenge me, to bathe in, even to alter my brave waves the way a piece of music will - the flow of words, entwined with the Spirit.  And to help me I decided to pick something with a little structure - in my case: the dust off their feet.

The dust is a retelling of the book of Acts [ok Brian McLaren does that part] and the book has thoughts/insights/comments/reflections/view points etc to help make it an immersion rather than just a read... 

I've only just started so i'll let you know how it goes... if you've tried let me know what you think and if you have any other good recomendations of books that let the bible read you then i'd love to hear them...