So I read a bunch of books over the summer - nothing new there - I'm always reading and thinking - after all my summer book reports the big question is - So What ? How does it change me? What are the challenges? And what am I going to do about them anyway?
The big thing I understand, is it is all founded on relationship (I know that doesn't sound very radical after all 'personal relationship with God' is the mantra of evangelicalism) but bear with me...
Maybe the realisation started a few years back when I really began to study the Bible in a lot more depth - looking at differing views of really fine scholars - and finding that there are competing opinions across a whole range of Christian thought - there isn't one version of the truth (controversy #1). Christianity is a broad church - literally!
Actually - what I have come to understand, is that Christianity is more like independent travel than a package holiday where you accept the whole thing whether you like it all or not. I have become aware that actually what I am looking for is a different skin - one I feel more comfortable in. It is still absolutely a Christian skin, but there are lots of Christians who understand their faith very differently from each other. I guess the branch I've been in for quite a while, and have over time begun to find an increasing dissonance with, is much more certain than I am comfortable with. (you're either in or you're not; you're either saved or you're not; you're either going to hell or heaven; you have to believe the whole Bible is literally true, not myth or story or narrative and other types of literature - Jonah was definitely swallowed by a big fish, there was literal garden with 2 trees and a serpent and actually that serpent was the devil etc.)...and I'm honestly not saying this to disrespect others who believe this (and OK I'm maybe exaggerating for effect!) But honestly, there is a liberation in discovering that you have a valid choice about the kind of journey you make, and that you can make choices about the elements of belief that make sense to you and that you wish to journey with.
You see I do have problems with the Bible (controversy #2) (I agree with Scott McKnight on the emergent podcast) - it doesn't really make any difference to me that the first 11 chapters of Genesis are not literally true; I really have no problem that there is such a thing as evolution (no actually that doesn't negate God - that's a category error as John Lennox points out); I have some real questions around some Christians' behaviours - (most of what is on the God Channel; Todd Bentley and his ilk, and what appears to me to be cynical manipulation and a particularly iniquitous brand of "superstitious christianity"); I have problems with hell; I don't care if the Bible is contradictory, that there was more than one Isaiah and that Paul was sometimes expressing an opinion; but I do have real issues about the immorality and the depiction of a god who is a mean, petty, war monger; I'm happy to ask the question about what kind of truth can be found in scripture. I understand that some of this is socially located and not universal theology; that some of this is down to partial revelation and narrow nationalism. The Bible, (unlike the Muslim belief in the Qu'ran or the book of Mormon, didn't pre-exist, wasn't handed down to us complete, by an angel) it is a product of the cultures and people in which and by whom it was written over many hundreds of years. (controversy #3) You have to understand that in order to make sense of it!
The relationship between the Bible and Christians has become significantly different in the last couple of hundred years; it has become individual, not located in community any more; it has completely mediated our understanding of God replacing our "felt" and "lived" experience; speaking into a specific time and place to a particular group of real people. It mirrors our move to "personal" salvation (and yes - as I tried to explain to the housegroup - to nonsense like the rapture - we are individually OK cos we're leaving anyway) (yip I know - controversy #4); no longer is the gospel about the transformational impact on society by a living, believing community.
That's why I like Rob Bell, Shane Claibourne, Emergent, Peter Rollins, Jamie Smith (and even Derrida, Foucault and Lyotard) etc. - it's about fundamentally redefining church as a transformational community; it's about permission to become a Christian traveller and not a package holiday maker passing through without touching the culture, living in my own personal Christian bubble eating at the tourist snack bars which sell egg and chips and show football on satellite TV. (does this make sense?)
What has become important to me is to search for understanding; learning to practice my faith in ways which come from many Christian traditions; which help me make sense of the world and God.
I do believe in a loving Creator and in the full revelation of this God being incarnated in Christ; I do believe that Jesus life and resurrection are just as important as his death; I understand this to be about love and showing a better way; I don't understand it to be legal, transactional or about assuaging God's wrath; I understand much better that theology is a conversation and that the gospel is always incarnated in a cultural context; and at it's heart is about a relationship, in fact the ultimate relationship.
On a final note (and in no way controversial I think), my daughter has started attending youth housegroup, run by a fantastic couple, and she's really loving it. She came home the other week and said - "Christianity has so many rules to follow" (the discussion had got around to going "up the town" on a Saturday night drinking and clubbing and what the Christian thing to do is). I said to her - "I don't understand God like that - Do you have a set of rules that you follow living in this family?" She thought about that, "No" she said. "Actually" I said "how we understand each other is through our relationship, living in the context of mutual love and acceptance. We love each other, and so we seek to understand one another and live together in a way that makes sense to us and honours the relationship". (that sounds a bit pretentious and I probably said it more simply - but she really got it)
I honestly understand God like this now. We find our journey in God completely mediated by his loving relationship with us. But our Christian lives are also mediated in community - in some senses it's never just about "God and me".
Tuesday 29 September 2009
Saturday 19 September 2009
Small Graces and Blogging
What do you do when you've had the busiest, most frenetic 5 weeks at work, culminating in a 2 day event which you've been responsible for, with an overnight stay; when you've been up half the previous night with a migraine and when you are just knackered?
Well - you come home, you walk through your empty house and go out to your back garden, you sit yourself down on your door step, look out over your garden, hear the silence, turn your face to feel the warmth from the last heat of the early evening sun, and feel a sense of peace as you contemplate life while joined on the step by the undemanding companionship of next door's cat; you scarf down 2 bags of weightwatchers cheesy puffs (only 70 calories a bag) and you become aware that God's grace comes to you in all sorts of ways, some of which seem small and seemingly insignificant.
That's been a whole year of blogging and it's a funny old thing. I guess I started because it seemed like an idea - spurred on by my maladjusted friend. An online journal that people can follow, or read from time to time, or stumble across as the case may be. I hadn't been on my blog for a couple of days and when I looked there had been hits from a couple of places in the States, quite a few places across the UK, Paris, Germany and Turkey all in the space of 48 hours. Some people come from my friend's blog, others follow some obscure search to do with Doris Day, or flying monkeys, or Foucault. You get to share big ideas and small blessings and it's a lot of fun.
Whichever way you came to it - thanks for reading!
Well - you come home, you walk through your empty house and go out to your back garden, you sit yourself down on your door step, look out over your garden, hear the silence, turn your face to feel the warmth from the last heat of the early evening sun, and feel a sense of peace as you contemplate life while joined on the step by the undemanding companionship of next door's cat; you scarf down 2 bags of weightwatchers cheesy puffs (only 70 calories a bag) and you become aware that God's grace comes to you in all sorts of ways, some of which seem small and seemingly insignificant.
That's been a whole year of blogging and it's a funny old thing. I guess I started because it seemed like an idea - spurred on by my maladjusted friend. An online journal that people can follow, or read from time to time, or stumble across as the case may be. I hadn't been on my blog for a couple of days and when I looked there had been hits from a couple of places in the States, quite a few places across the UK, Paris, Germany and Turkey all in the space of 48 hours. Some people come from my friend's blog, others follow some obscure search to do with Doris Day, or flying monkeys, or Foucault. You get to share big ideas and small blessings and it's a lot of fun.
Whichever way you came to it - thanks for reading!
Monday 14 September 2009
Summer Reading #s 3 & 4
This is taking me ages so I thought I'd do the last 2 books together. They are both from the same series anyway, edited by James K A Smith called "The Church and Postmodern Culture".
Who's Afraid of Postmodernism - Taking Derrida, Lyotard and Foucault to Church - James KA Smith
What Would Jesus Deconstruct - The Good news of Postmodernism for the Church.
Those of you who know me well, know I've been looking at this stuff for years but having been listening to and doing a bit more reading about emergent - Derrida is featuring large and I wanted to get to grips with this continental philosophy stuff in a bit more depth. Also who could resist a book with the title "What Would Jesus Deconstruct"? - (WWJD) - (yip that's the kind of thing which really appeals to me)
Jamie Smith looks at these 3 philosophers and deconstructs their "slogans" in a way which opens up their arguments really helpfully showing the applicability and benefit to the church. He also argues that to be relevant the church needs to look back at her traditions and reclaim them for the 21st century.
The "slogans" are
"There is nothing outside the text" Jacques Derrida
"Postmodernity is incredulity toward meta-narratives" Jean-Francois Lyotard
"Power is knowledge" - Michel Foucault
His agenda is clear - he wishes to shift from modern Christianity "where the base 'ingredient' is the individual"; Christianity as a system of truth or ideas; an intellectualised, commodified private faith affair between the individual and God where the role of the church is to provide a place of fellowship with other individuals who have a private relationship with God; the church then is simply a collection of individuals. Instead he argues for a living community embodying its head; genuine community; resisting talking about Christians as individuals; the notion of the "holy catholic church"undoes modern individualism; there is no Christianity apart from the body of Christ which is the church. The church does not exist for me; the church is the site where God renews and transforms us.
If you think that's quite radical then wait till you hear this bit - "What I a sinner need is not so much answers, as reformation of my will and heart...practices of friendship and being called to get along with those one doesn't like..the church for instance is a place to learn patience by practice"!!! (help!)
"Nothing is more countercultural than a community serving the Suffering Servant in a world devoted to consumption and violence."
It's actually quite hard to summarise this book because the arguments taken out of context can be misconstrued - which is ironic given, as Derrida says - "Everything is interpretation - i.e. there's nothing outside the text!". Let me give it a bash very briefly.
If everything is interpretation then we are free to interpret the world differently, the church becomes more prophetic while retaining its humility; it becomes countercultural and prophetic by its deeds; stops being apologetic in both senses and puts its interpretation openly into the marketplace. That's Derrida's bit.
Lyotard helps us to realise that "scientific knowledge, which considered itself to be a triumph over narrative knowledge, covertly grounds itself in a narrative; they are the false appeals to the universal, rational, scientific criteria - as though they were divorced from any particular myth or narrative. For the postmodernist every scientist is a believer...the postmodern critique demands not that modern thought relinquish its faith, but that it own up to it... the notion of reducing Christian faith to 4 spiritual laws signals a deep capitulation to scientific knowledge whereas postmodernism signals the recovery of narrative knowledge and should entail a more robust, unapologetic proclamation of the story of God in Christ."
Foucault talks about what counts as knowledge being constituted within networks of power - social, political and economic. "He sees through the neat and tidy claims to objective truth, seeing them as only masks of power. Many people are defined by the primary goal of consumption, they stake their identity on their material possessions...their ultimate goal is to be faithful consumers...we need to recognise the antithesis between the dominant culture's understanding of the human calling and the biblical understanding of our ultimate vocation...this must be cultivated by practices of sanctification."
OK - this is a huge post but I'm determined to finish - then in my next post I'll deal with the question on every one's lips - So What?
WWJDeconstruct - here's some quotes and you can make your own mind up
"I am still looking for the text that supports the idea that "Christians" means people who should be free to accumulate as much wealth for themselves as they possibly can under the law, while letting the needs of the poor be met painlessly by "charity"- by people of means who will voluntarily give of their overflow - so that they do not have to share any more of their wealth than is unavoidable"
"A politics of the kingdom would be marked by madness of forgiveness, generosity, mercy and hospitality. The dangerous memory of the crucified body of Jesus poses a threat to a world organised around the disastrous concept of power, something that is reflected today in the widespread critique of the concept of "sovereignty" - of the sovereignty of autonomous subjects and the sovereignty of nations powerful enough to get away with acting unilaterally and in their own self interests. The crucified body of Jesus proposes not that we keep theology out of politics but that we think theology otherwise, by way of another paradigm, another theology, requiring us to think of God otherwise, as a power of powerlessness, as opposed to the theology of omnipotence that underlies sovereignty. The call that issues from the crucified body of Jesus solicits our response, for it is we who have mountains to move by our faith and we who have enemies to move by our love. It is we who have to make the weakness of God stronger than the power of the world."
Both books are great - I'd probably recommend Jamie Smith's book as being more accessible but both challenged and broadened my understanding of God and made me reflect again on what it means to be a Christian.
Who's Afraid of Postmodernism - Taking Derrida, Lyotard and Foucault to Church - James KA Smith
What Would Jesus Deconstruct - The Good news of Postmodernism for the Church.
Those of you who know me well, know I've been looking at this stuff for years but having been listening to and doing a bit more reading about emergent - Derrida is featuring large and I wanted to get to grips with this continental philosophy stuff in a bit more depth. Also who could resist a book with the title "What Would Jesus Deconstruct"? - (WWJD) - (yip that's the kind of thing which really appeals to me)
Jamie Smith looks at these 3 philosophers and deconstructs their "slogans" in a way which opens up their arguments really helpfully showing the applicability and benefit to the church. He also argues that to be relevant the church needs to look back at her traditions and reclaim them for the 21st century.
The "slogans" are
"There is nothing outside the text" Jacques Derrida
"Postmodernity is incredulity toward meta-narratives" Jean-Francois Lyotard
"Power is knowledge" - Michel Foucault
His agenda is clear - he wishes to shift from modern Christianity "where the base 'ingredient' is the individual"; Christianity as a system of truth or ideas; an intellectualised, commodified private faith affair between the individual and God where the role of the church is to provide a place of fellowship with other individuals who have a private relationship with God; the church then is simply a collection of individuals. Instead he argues for a living community embodying its head; genuine community; resisting talking about Christians as individuals; the notion of the "holy catholic church"undoes modern individualism; there is no Christianity apart from the body of Christ which is the church. The church does not exist for me; the church is the site where God renews and transforms us.
If you think that's quite radical then wait till you hear this bit - "What I a sinner need is not so much answers, as reformation of my will and heart...practices of friendship and being called to get along with those one doesn't like..the church for instance is a place to learn patience by practice"!!! (help!)
"Nothing is more countercultural than a community serving the Suffering Servant in a world devoted to consumption and violence."
It's actually quite hard to summarise this book because the arguments taken out of context can be misconstrued - which is ironic given, as Derrida says - "Everything is interpretation - i.e. there's nothing outside the text!". Let me give it a bash very briefly.
If everything is interpretation then we are free to interpret the world differently, the church becomes more prophetic while retaining its humility; it becomes countercultural and prophetic by its deeds; stops being apologetic in both senses and puts its interpretation openly into the marketplace. That's Derrida's bit.
Lyotard helps us to realise that "scientific knowledge, which considered itself to be a triumph over narrative knowledge, covertly grounds itself in a narrative; they are the false appeals to the universal, rational, scientific criteria - as though they were divorced from any particular myth or narrative. For the postmodernist every scientist is a believer...the postmodern critique demands not that modern thought relinquish its faith, but that it own up to it... the notion of reducing Christian faith to 4 spiritual laws signals a deep capitulation to scientific knowledge whereas postmodernism signals the recovery of narrative knowledge and should entail a more robust, unapologetic proclamation of the story of God in Christ."
Foucault talks about what counts as knowledge being constituted within networks of power - social, political and economic. "He sees through the neat and tidy claims to objective truth, seeing them as only masks of power. Many people are defined by the primary goal of consumption, they stake their identity on their material possessions...their ultimate goal is to be faithful consumers...we need to recognise the antithesis between the dominant culture's understanding of the human calling and the biblical understanding of our ultimate vocation...this must be cultivated by practices of sanctification."
OK - this is a huge post but I'm determined to finish - then in my next post I'll deal with the question on every one's lips - So What?
WWJDeconstruct - here's some quotes and you can make your own mind up
"I am still looking for the text that supports the idea that "Christians" means people who should be free to accumulate as much wealth for themselves as they possibly can under the law, while letting the needs of the poor be met painlessly by "charity"- by people of means who will voluntarily give of their overflow - so that they do not have to share any more of their wealth than is unavoidable"
"A politics of the kingdom would be marked by madness of forgiveness, generosity, mercy and hospitality. The dangerous memory of the crucified body of Jesus poses a threat to a world organised around the disastrous concept of power, something that is reflected today in the widespread critique of the concept of "sovereignty" - of the sovereignty of autonomous subjects and the sovereignty of nations powerful enough to get away with acting unilaterally and in their own self interests. The crucified body of Jesus proposes not that we keep theology out of politics but that we think theology otherwise, by way of another paradigm, another theology, requiring us to think of God otherwise, as a power of powerlessness, as opposed to the theology of omnipotence that underlies sovereignty. The call that issues from the crucified body of Jesus solicits our response, for it is we who have mountains to move by our faith and we who have enemies to move by our love. It is we who have to make the weakness of God stronger than the power of the world."
Both books are great - I'd probably recommend Jamie Smith's book as being more accessible but both challenged and broadened my understanding of God and made me reflect again on what it means to be a Christian.
Wednesday 2 September 2009
Summer Reading #2
"Jesus Wants to Save Christians - A Manifesto for the Church in Exile" - Rob Bell
I really like Rob Bell's books - I think he's a great communicator, he's honest, he's challenging and he's scholarly. If you haven't read anything by him before I would definitely recommend him. I've read "Velvet Elvis - Repainting the Christian Faith" and am currently reading "Drops Like Stars: A Few Thoughts on Creativity and Suffering".
In this book he focuses on "empire", charting the whole history of Israel in relation to both the empires they came up against and the empire they became; and how this corrupted what God had originally intended through the covenant; the consequences and the legacy of that; and the current application of "empire" as it relates to the church. His approach is scholarly - his books usually bring a great deal of the historical and cultural background into play giving a much clearer understanding of context and place, and I always get some insight which I never noticed before. All good. His books however are very very accessible - not a daunting read at all. I found it all really interesting but this book also packs a punch and the chapter entitled "Swollen-Bellied Black Babies" really challenges and brings the whole issue to a head. I'm going to quote from it, although I'm a bit afraid that it might diminish the impact of what he says - because he builds his picture and constructs his challenge in a really great way then socks it to you;
I really like Rob Bell's books - I think he's a great communicator, he's honest, he's challenging and he's scholarly. If you haven't read anything by him before I would definitely recommend him. I've read "Velvet Elvis - Repainting the Christian Faith" and am currently reading "Drops Like Stars: A Few Thoughts on Creativity and Suffering".
In this book he focuses on "empire", charting the whole history of Israel in relation to both the empires they came up against and the empire they became; and how this corrupted what God had originally intended through the covenant; the consequences and the legacy of that; and the current application of "empire" as it relates to the church. His approach is scholarly - his books usually bring a great deal of the historical and cultural background into play giving a much clearer understanding of context and place, and I always get some insight which I never noticed before. All good. His books however are very very accessible - not a daunting read at all. I found it all really interesting but this book also packs a punch and the chapter entitled "Swollen-Bellied Black Babies" really challenges and brings the whole issue to a head. I'm going to quote from it, although I'm a bit afraid that it might diminish the impact of what he says - because he builds his picture and constructs his challenge in a really great way then socks it to you;
"Imagine the average youth group in the average church on the average Sunday. Imagine visiting this youth group and having the pastor say to you "I just can't get my kids interested in Jesus. Do you have any suggestions?"
How do you respond?
To begin with the church has a youth group. This is a brand new idea in church history. A luxury. All the babies and older folks and the men and the women and widows and students aren't in the one room, but they've gone to separate rooms?
And there are resources for this? People and organisational structures and a budget? Let's imagine that in this case, this pastor, this youth pastor, is paid a salary for his or her work. A church with enough resources to pay someone to oversee the students. Once again, this is brand new, almost unheard of in most of the rest of the churches in the world, and in church history, a brand new invention.
This salary can be paid and this building can be built because people in the congregation have surplus. They have fed themselves and their children and bought clothes and houses, and now, after these expenses, there is still money available. And this money is given in an act of generosity to the church, which disperses it to various places, among them the bank account of the pastor.
In many, if not most of the churches in the world, immediate needs simply don't allow for such luxuries - too many people are hungry, too many don't have a roof, too many are sick - and so any surplus is spent immediately on the basic needs staring them in the face, people dying here, right now, today.
But this particular church is blessed, and we should be clear about this - it is blessing, it is good. It is fortunate that this particular church doesn't have those issues. This church has enough resources to hire a pastor who had the resources to get training to gather these students in the student room to teach them about the way of Jesus. Many Christians around the world would simply stand in awe of that kind of blessing.
And the students in this church, these are good kids. They are from families who just want to see their kids become good Christians.
Imagine just how much is available to them. They have more at their fingertips than any generation in the history of the world - more information, more entertainment, more ideas, more ways to kill time, more options.
Many of them own more than one pair of shoes.
There are even some among them who have eaten at least one meal every day of their lives.
So we are talking about a minuscule minority of kids in the world
At the exit off the highway near their church is a Best Buy and a Chilli's and a Circuit City and a McDonald's and a Wal-Mart and Bed, Bath and Beyond much like the other towns in their state and in their country. The music they listen to is distributed by one of 5 major corporations, which also own the movie studios that create the movies they watch, which are also connected to the corporations that create the food they eat and the commercials they watch, which also have significant ties to the clothes they wear and the cell phones they own and the ring tones on their cell phones.....
So each week they gather to hear a talk from the pastor.
The pastor tells them about the Jesus revolution.
About Jesus resisting the system.
About the blood of the cross.
About many Christians getting arrested.
About Jesus having dinner with prostitutes and tax collectors.
About people sharing their possessions.
About Jesus telling a man to sell everything.
About the uniqueness of their story in the larger story of redemption.
How do children of the empire understand the Saviour who was killed by an empire?
How does a 12 year old who has never had hunger pangs that lasted more than an hour understand a story about a 12 year old providing fish and bread for thousands of chronically hungry people?
How do kids who are surrounded by more abundance than in any other generation in the history of humanity take seriously a Messiah who said "I have been anointed to preach good news to the poor?"
How do they fathom that half the world is too poor to feed it's kids when their church just spent 2 years raising money to build an addition to their building?
They gather, they sing, they hear a talk from the pastor, and then they get back in the car with their parents and they go home; the garage door opens up, the car goes in, and the garage door goes down.
This is the revolution?
This is what Jesus had in mind?
And so the youth pastor turns to you and says, again, " I just can't get my students engaged with Jesus. Do you have any suggestions?"
What do you say?
How do you respond?
Your only hope, of course, would be to remind him or her that there is blood on the doorposts of the universe"
He goes onto talk about the Passover and the Eucharist
"What if Jesus ...was talking about our actually enacting what the ritual is all about over and over, again and again, year after year? What if the "do this" he primarily meant wasn't the ritual he was leading his disciples through at that moment. What if the "do this" was his whole way of life?...the "do this"part is our lives. Opening ourselves up to the mystery of resurrection, open for the liberation of others, allowing our bodies to be broken and our blood poured out, discovering our Eucharist. Listening. And going.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)