Theofragen

Next Theology on Tap-Oneself as Another

2007-06-18T07:32:00.001-05:00

This Thursday, at the Corner Tavern in Little Five Points, we will be hosting a theology on tap conversation from 7-9. Our topic for conversation will be otherness. How do we approach the Other without totalizing her? How do we encounter the Other as a Self when we ourselves are also a Self? The Bible, along with many other sacred texts I might add, has a great deal to say about how we receive those who are otherwise than we. Please join us for this illuminating conversation. Peace.

Next Theology on Tap

2007-05-25T13:48:00.000-05:00

If you are in the Atlanta area next Thursday (5/31) around 8PM, feel free to join us at the Corner Tavern in Little Five Points for a theology on tap conversation. This month we will be talking about Imagination as both a theological and philosophical concept. Join us for a pint and a burger as we engage in this open discussion. Peace.

Amahoro Africa-Day One

2007-05-21T08:50:00.000-05:00

My friend, Luke Miller, posted the following summary on the Amahoro Africa blog:

Opening
The conversation started today with a lively time of praise led by the Worship Harvest Team.

Claude and Brian welcomed participants. Claude greeted them with ‘Amahoro’ – a wish for peace and a call to share peace.

Devotional Note – Edward Simiu – Kenya
Edward noted two aspects about the African culture that make this gathering a unique event – Africa loves conversation and Africa values presence.

The Amahoro Gathering puts these two aspects together, Edward said - we may not all be able to write books, but we can talk and presence ministers and speaks to us. Presence is worth 10,000 words in Africa as a picture is worth 1,000 in the West. He thanked all those who traveled long distances to share the ministry of presence in this conversation.

Brian invited Mabiala Justin – Robert Kenzo and noted that what is most gratifying about this conversation is that it is no longer Western voices being heard alone but now people are listening to one another.

Robert Kenzo presented the first address: On African Postcolonial Theology: The Imperative to Differ

Kenzo was frustrated with Christianity until he started reading Postcolonial theology and realized there is a different way to being Christian.

He noted that the church in Africa is at the crossroads poised to become a major player but will only do so if we have the courage to be different.

The world is becoming a global village and reason has entered its postmodern era. Post modernity is here in Africa too but is being lived under the guise of ‘post colonialism’, which is not a historical period but an attitude. Those whose history has been affected by colonialism cannot move forward until they have dealt with the demons of colonialism. There is a need to deal with colonialism even within the church, Kenzo asserted, ‘if we do not define ourselves, others will define us’ he emphasized. Identity is created and not inherited and we are free to take from the sources and recreate ourselves. Kenzo can for example be both Congolese, an African, modern and a Christian. In Christ we are being recreated.

Kenzo went on to challenge that post colonialism is in reality politics of difference and it is okay to be different as Africans. We need to have the courage to denounce Western theology for, he argued, all theology is contextual. He emphasized the need for Africa to realize the relevance of post colonialism to Africa.

The West has borrowed a lot from us and it is time we reclaimed what they took from us. Post modernity values uniqueness, distinctiveness and we in Africa need to re-state, defend and protect ourselves. Christians need to ask themselves the question ‘What does Jesus Christ mean for us today? Where is the church? And to address the challenge in Africa, Kenzo called on Christians to be bold and creative.

Participants continued the conversation in small groups the rest of the afternoon.

The Transformational Gospel vs the Evacuation Gospel
Claude Nikondeha shared how dissatisfied he got with the gospel he grew up hearing as a son of a Free Methodist preacher. This gospel did not seem to respond to the poverty, hatred and inequality he saw in his life and yet appeared to keep Christians hopeful in these circumstances. Jesus was supposed to be coming back soon and so Christians were supposed to be ready for heaven and forget about the troubles of the world they were living in – for a short span of life.

In spite of the fact that it was presented as a choice between the church and the world, Claude felt he wanted both, he wanted to study and build a career but also be a Christian but in choosing further studies he seemed to be choosing the world.

As destiny would have it, in his pursuit of ‘the world’, he met the Jesus he had been hoping to find, the Jesus who cared about salvation and going to heaven but also cared about life here on earth. He realized that what he had wished was true, the Kingdom of heaven begins here and Jesus cares about life here too.

Claude went on to challenge the participants about the true meaning of the transformational gospel. The Jubilee in Leviticus 25 was God’s way of narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor, of curbing the greed of the rich. They could not amass much wealth because they had to give back in the fiftieth year. That was God’s vision of the kingdom coming on earth as it is in heaven. In instructing the rich young ruler to sell all he possessed and follow him, Jesus was teaching the principle, ‘I am only good when you are good.’

He challenged participants to extend Jubilee to one another to give back whatever they could, to sell all they had and give to the poor because the transforming power of Jesus is at work now. Jesus is jubilee and we need to show true love and build a viable kingdom.

After Claude’s talk, participants were challenged to put in practise right away what they had and a participant felt led to remind them about the early church how they shared what they had. A love offering was taken and participants gave of their money. (This money will go to help those who experienced financial difficulties in getting to the conference.)

The evening closed with the sharing of communion.

The second day of the Amahoro Africa Gathering started on a warm note after last night’s fellowship. Participants were challenged to practise the wholistic gospel and are thinking about what it means to sell what they have and give to the poor, what it means to really follow Jesus and extend jubilee to one another, what it really means to build God’s kingdom here on earth.

My Impressions:
Dr. Kenzo's lecture was the highlight of the day. I emailed my wife after the small groups and here is what I wrote:

We landed in Uganda at night and have been at the hotel the whole time since, so I'm not sure what the country looks like. Last night reminded me of Sri Lanka in that droves of people were just standing around on the highway while kamikazee drivers play chicken with one another. Lots of fun.

The opening session of the gathering this morning was fantastic. The "work group" I'm in bored me to tears. We are supposed to meet in this small group every day for 2 hours to figure out what the trajectory for Amahoro Africa should be. So far we have only experienced the difference that each of us bring. We are all pastors (and only two of us are I's and TJ's) so the rest of the people drone on and on about random stories that are supposed to prove their points. I guess that is human nature: to define what is universally true by one's particular experiences.

I'm very tired now after sitting through that session. I'm going to get some tea and see if I can steal a quick nap before dinner. We meet from 8am-10pm everyday. So exhausting!

Now that I read over this, free from jet lag, I am reminded of how emotionally draining I felt during the work group time.

Amahoro Africa

2007-05-21T08:31:00.001-05:00

Last week I returned from the Amahoro Africa gathering in Uganda. Over two hundred African, North American, European and Central American leaders met together for four days of conversation about the church that is emerging in Africa. The conversations were as eye-opening as they were generative. The picture is of my new friend and roommate during the gathering, Pontus Karlsson (a church planter from Sweden) and my old friend, Jessy Togba-Doya (a transformational missionary in Liberia). Over the next few days I'll be posting some of my reflections from the gathering along with my experiences while I visited Liberia. Peace.

I love being a daddy

2007-05-02T10:03:00.000-05:00

Enough Said!

.bE Service

2007-04-27T13:36:00.000-05:00

Last night we hosted an alt.worship experience at Grandma Luke's Bakery in Little Five Points. The service was entitled, "What do I love when I love my God?" In the spirit of Pete Rollins and Jack Caputo, we put Augustine into conversation with deconstructionist philosophers and apophatic mystics. It was loads of fun for a religion nerd like myself to work on the content for this venue.
I worked with my friend and uber-blogger, Adam, on this project. Adam designed the aesthetic elements of the service and together we transformed ideas into stations. Thanks to Sarah, Gareth, Johnny and Eric for helping with the set up!

We had a bunch of visitors at this event, which was fun, as well as many dear friends. Once I get a chance, I'll post up all of the content and more pictures from this event. Peace.

On living close to the airport… and not flying to Philadelphia

2007-04-18T09:22:00.000-05:00

Well, it’s six o’clock in the morning and I’m sitting in the terminal waiting for my flight to Philly for the WWJD? conversation. I hear you: Jake, weren’t you supposed to fly out yesterday? Well, since you are asking, yes, I was. However, Airtran decided that they needed to cancel my flight yesterday and the next available flight wasn’t until 7 AM today. But wait a minute; you are probably asking yourself, does that mean you had to leave the airport yesterday when your flight was canceled and then return at this God-awful hour, going through the oh so pleasant TSA rigmarole? Yep. It’s been loads of fun.

So the moral of this story is that you should live close to the airport. I only live 10 minutes from the Atlanta airport, which makes a big difference when something like this happens.

But there is another moral to this story: do whatever you can to avoid the Philadelphia airport. I have had more problems with flights in and out of Philly than all of my other bad flight experiences put together … times ten! That makes the prospects of doing further study at this school, which is over an hour from the airport, ominous. With any luck I’ll be at the Emergent Philosophical Conversation by mid-morning. (But I still have to jump through all of the rental car hoops)

A Blogger with a Baby

2007-04-16T08:52:00.000-05:00

Alright. So I've been rather slack in my blog posts over the past ten weeks. I could tell you about how busy I've been at work these past days, or about all of the joys and new duties that have come with fatherhood... but those are just excuses. I've been reflecting upon my blogging hiatus this morning and I've come up with a few reasons why I have minimized my posts.

1. It's not because I haven't been thinking. My brain did not take a vacation once Taylor was born. Quite the contrary. Having a new baby in the house has brought my whole world under erasure. Being a father has sent me on an journey inward: reflecting, pondering, questioning, about this new corner I've turned in my life. But I'm still thinking.

2. It's not because I have not been reading. Like most of you, my blogging buddies, I enjoy writing about books I'm reading. I've recently read some of the most exciting books that I've read in years. In all honesty, though, I've been reading in preparation for this event and this event, both of which require preparatory reading. But I'm still reading.

3. I'm still asking questions. That's what being a 'theofragen' is all about, right? Asking substantive questions about God? I've been leading or co-leading many events over the past few months which have generated many questions about God, church, and culture. Some have come as a result of my preparation for these events; others from the questions posed by the participants. But I'm still asking questions.

So what gives? Why haven't I been blogging?

The only answer I can come up with is that I'm exhausted. The late-night diaper changes, the early morning bottle feedings, and the over-achiever in me that wants to be the best father I can be, all have taken their toll on me. It is one think to think thoughts, read books, or ask questions. It's quite another thing to turn them into a blog post. No sleep = no blogging.

But we have turned a corner in the Myers's household. Taylor is mostly sleeping through the night, so the sleep deprivation has abated, for the time being (although I'm told that teething will present a whole new set of problems). So, I'm back. I'm going to share my thoughts, reading-reflections, and questions with you all once again. Thanks for your patience. Peace.

Alt Worship in Little Five Points

2007-04-02T08:51:00.000-05:00

At Trinitas, we profess four core values: Think. Pray. Serve. Be. We are bringing all of these aspects of our community together for an open alternative worship experience we call .Be.

The gathering will provide participants an opportunity to reflect, pray, worship, and experience the presence of God in community. The gathering will be held at Grandma Luke's Bakery and Cafe in Little Five Points from 7-9 PM on Thursday, April 26th.

If you find yourself in the Atlanta area and would like to be a part of this alternative worship experience, you are all welcome. Grace and peace.

Easter and the Lost Tomb of Jesus

2007-03-21T08:15:00.000-05:00

Director James Cameron claims that he has scientific proof that Jesus Christ was never resurrected. While filming his new documentary with Simcha Jacobovici, they supposedly discovered the burial cave where Jesus and his family were buried near Jerusalem. And get this, Jesus was a father.

The ossuaries discovered bear the names: Jesua, son of Joseph, Mary, Mary, Mathew, Jofa and Judah, son of Jesua according to this article in Time magazine.

In just a few weeks, Christians across the globe will join together in jubilant celebration, confessing that Jesus was raised from the dead. Are Jesus' resurrection and ascension purely myth, with no historical correlation whatsoever? Is the alleged Jesus Family Tomb discovery proof that the Easter story is sheer propaganda fabricated to garner support for the Way--Christianity? If the archaeological and DNA evidence are conclusive, what does that mean for Christians? Does that mean that Jesus was not God incarnate? Does it mean anything for believers in Christ?

Join us next Thursday, March 29th, for a theology on tap conversation about Easter and the Lost Tomb of Jesus. We'll be engaging one another about the validity of this new controversial film, but, more importantly, about what this means for faith.

We will gather at the Corner Tavern in L5P this month (so that we don't have to compete with the roar of motorcycles outside the Vortex). The discussion will run from at 7:00-9:00PM. Please email Jake or Johnny if you wish to attend so that we will know how many people to expect. Peace.

Southern Baptists...Hmmm

2007-03-08T10:18:00.000-05:00

So, some random guy, named Roger Moran, whom I have never met, took some shots at Emergent Village, CBF, and me of all people at an SBC meeting in Missouri last month. Marty Duren blogged about it here. (Thanks to Greg Warner for the tip).

Here's what he says towards the end of his rant:

In fact, leaders within the CBF are now saying that the emerging/emergent movement is a great fit for the CBF—and the CBF is currently building relationships with the emergent movement. CBF is now developing four web pages on teir website devoted to the emerging/emergent movement.

One CBF leader, a church planter from Atlanta named Jake Meyers, has noted the best way to describe the emerging church movement is “beer, candles, and theologian Soren Kierkegaard.” (Translated that means: Beer; ancient and mystical rituals; and an openness to theological liberalism.
Interestingly, this CBF leader (Jake Meyers) serves on the coordinating group of Emergent Village, the far-left wing of the emerging church movement where Brian McLaren serves as chairman of the board. According to Emergent Village, they have everything from a Texas Baptists pastor to a New England lesbian Episcopal priest.

Serving on the board of Emergent Village is Chris Seay, an emerging church planter from Houston, Texas who was one of the featured speakers at the Younger Leaders Summit in Nashville, hosted by Lifeway’s Jimmy Draper in 2005 and by 2006 was led by NAMB’s Ed Stetzer.

And while I am certainly perplexed as to why a board member of Emergent Village was a featured speaker at our Younger Leaders Summit, I am equally concerned about the particular group of younger leaders we seem to be pursuing for leadership positions in the SBC.

For withing this group of young SBC leaders, are: those who strongly oppose the SBC’s long standing position on alcohol; and those who now want us to move toward embracing the charismatic practice of speaking in tongues; and those who are now telling us that CBF really wasn’t much of a problem; and those who are now calling for a “revolution” to move the SBC back to what they call the “center.”

Dr. Mohler has stated that: “The Emergent movement represents a significant challenge to biblical Christianity.”

And he’s absolutely right, but the greater immediate challenge may be to convince certain SBC leaders to stop lending the credibility of the SBC and its institutions to a movement that is dripping with error.

The seriousness of the emerging/emergent movement and the degree to which it has infiltrated the SBC warrants a full and thorough investigation. And I would argue that the investigation needs to start at the North American Mission Board, and most specifically in the area of church planting.

As we refer this motion to Lifeway, I would ask that the Executive Committee express our deep and serious concern about the emerging/emergent movement and request that Lifeway honor this request for a full and thorough investigation.

Next Theology on Tap...Theodicy

2007-02-08T10:22:00.000-05:00

Theodicy is a fancy theological word. It is used to describe a process whereby philosophers and theologians attempt to reconcile the existence of evil in the world with belief in a God who is supposed to be both good and powerful. Here is the dilemma:

If
1) There is a God, and
2) That God is good, and
3) That God is powerful,
Then
4) How does one account for evil and suffering in the world?

This conundrum leaves us with several possible conclusions:

1) There is no God (God is dead or never existed in the first place)
2) There is a God, but that God is not powerful enough to hold back the tsunami of suffering and evil in the world (God is impotent)
3) There is a God and that God is powerful enough to avert suffering and overcome evil and yet chooses not to (God is apathetic), or . . .
4) Your answer to this important question.

Join us on Thursday, February 22nd at 8PM at the Vortex in Little Five Points to discuss this intriguing topic. (Please send me or Johnny an email if you are able to attend so we will know how much room we will need. Thanks).

World, Meet Taylor Marie!

2007-02-01T17:36:00.000-05:00

Given the fact that we were five days late, Abby was following me everywhere I needed to go just in case we needed to make a mad dash to the hospital. That's how a 10 month+ pregnant woman ends up lurking around at an Emergent gathering. Around 3:00 on Tuesday, Tony Jones was just getting started with his talk at the Mainline Emergent/s Gathering at Columbia Seminary. Abby had grown increasingly uncomfortable sitting on the hard pews at Columbia Presbyterian Church, so we were standing at the back. By 3:30 it was time to leave. We headed home and went for a two-mile walk around Grant Park to see if her contractions would intensify. They did. At around 7, Abby's contractions were about five minutes apart so we hopped in the car and drove over to the hospital.

The entire laboring process was absolutely incredible. Neither of us had ever been through this before so we were relying on friends' stories about their children's births and the Ross-and-Rachelesque sitcom scenarios concocted to fill space between car commercials. I was expecting lots of screaming and profanity; however, I was pleasantly surprised. Abby was more like a Zen Yoga-master than she was like a high school football coach. As each contraction grew more intense and closer together than the last, her slow, controlled breathing responded in step. I was so proud of my wife and I was rather proud of the support I was able to offer her (well placed massages, slowly counting to help keep her breathing focused, bringing her cold compresses) if that is not to bold to say. If it is, then that's alright too.

At day's end, Abby was in labor for only five hours, measuring from the first stages of discomfort to the time that our beautiful little girl was in her mommy's arms. Little Taylor Marie came into this world at 11Pm on January 30th, 2007. Abby and I wish to thank all of our friends and family who prayed for us during this process (especially my friend, Jason, who surprised us by driving all the way down to Atlanta from Richmond, VA only to spend a few hours with us and then returned home through the sleet and snow to be back at work on Thursday for an 11 o'clock meeting). Taylor got a perfect bill of health from the pediatrician and Abby is recovering quite well too. Peace.

We're a go

2007-01-30T18:16:00.000-05:00

Five days late.
Four minutes apart.
We're a go for some baby birthin'.

The only bummer is that I won't be able to share a pint with my Mainline Emergent/s friends tonight at the Brickstore Pub. A new daughter, or a pint of Belgian ale...?
... The pub can wait; I'm gonna be a daddy! Pray for us. Peace.

Theology on Tap Recap

2007-01-21T07:57:00.000-05:00

This week I co-hosted the first organized and intentional Theology on Tap in L5P for Trinitas. I say 'organized' and 'intentional' because this is largely what I've been doing informally with small groups of folks, individuals, and poker aficionados for the past year. Last Thursday night was different. From the very diverse group who showed up (about half of the participants are beleaguered Christians, the other half agnostics, with ages ranging from the mid twenties to the mid sixties), I gleaned many insights into the mysteries of God and the way God chooses to manifest God's self in different contexts. The conversation was lively, generative, and surprisingly hopeful.

Our next Theology on Tap will be Thursday, February 22nd, again at the Vortex in L5P starting at 8PM. As we get closer to the date I'll post more details about it.

One of the Theology on Tap participants, a retired Chemist who led the faculty at Furman University for many years, sent me the following excerpt from Deeprak Chopra that connects with our discussion last Thursday. Thanks for sending it, Scott. Enjoy:

Every cause, ideal, spiritual movement or soul teaching is about answering the question: Who am I? Fundamentalists of every stripe want this question answered once and for all by an unquestioned authority. They may succeed in quelling doubt for a while, but God has nothing to say and everything to say. I am fond of Thomas Merton’s words: “The search for God consists of arriving at a place and discovering that God has just left.” Which is as it should be. The essence of human nature is to reach beyond what we already know about ourselves.
At this moment we are faced with ferment and potential chaos as outmoded religious beliefs struggle to prove that they are as strong as ever. Psychiatry professor Susan Smalley says, quite realistically, that no one can “let go” of any belief until the void it would leave behind is filled. Those who have already “let go” of God aren’t necessarily better off than fundamentalists. They too have a void to fill.
God won’t leave us alone as long as human beings feel afraid and lonely. God might evolve—so one hopes—into something other than a white-bearded authority figure with a taste for vengeance. In moderate denominations that transformation happened a long, long time ago. But somehow we couldn’t handle a nicer God. Millions of people feel too hollow and afraid, angry and attacked, lonely and disconnected to believe in a benign divinity. This phenomenon is called alienation. It was well diagnosed by Marx and Freud, who pointed out that the human psyche suffers terribly when people are yanked out of a connection with Nature, when traditions stop being a safety net, when dislocation and insecurity are the daily norm.
The reason 87 percent of North Americans tell pollsters they never had a doubt about the existence of God isn’t rock-ribbed faith. It’s fear of the alternative, a cosmos dominated by the void left by an absent God. Whatever our beliefs may be, we all have to fill that void. It would be an act of good faith if the Religious Right could concede that we’re all in this together. It would be an equal act of faith if the enemies of the Religious Right made the same concession. Spirituality would then move forward, and on a global basis we could continue the universal quest, which is to unite heaven and Earth, first in our minds, then in every place our minds inhabit.

Amahoro Africa

2007-01-19T17:43:00.000-05:00

I'm very excited to be participating in the Amahoro Africa gathering in Uganda this May. There I will be learning and listening--along with sixty or so other pastors, teachers, artists, and authors from the US and Europe--from African church leaders and theologians. I'm also extremely excited about the opportunity to work alongside two friends who are serving in the Balama region of Liberia. At this gathering we will break bread and drink wine at table together, envisioning a postcolonial African church with its myriad indigenous expressions.

Brian McLaren, one of the event's leaders, recently sent the Amahoro participants a very hopeful email. Below I've posted a few points that Brian made. For those of you stateside who are also going, drop me a line sometime so we can connect before the event. Peace.

"The old colonial missionaries came to preach and teach and fix and convert. In this postcolonial moment, we are coming ...

Not to preach, but to listen. One of the ways we show respect for human beings is by believing they have important things to say, and by asking questions, trying to appreciate and learn. That will be our "postcolonial" mission. The most important moments of your experience will be encounters with people where you ask questions, where you pay attention, where you listen. We are coming ...

Not to teach but to learn. Of course, only Africans can teach us what it's like to live in Africa. But there's so much more they can teach us - things about God, about faith, and about ourselves. We are coming ...

Not to fix, but to be fixed. As Westerners (and especially those of us from the U.S.) we often assume we are normative, normal, and native. But we are a minority, an odd minority, an odd minority with an unprecedented lack of awareness of our history and identity. Through our encounter with our African brothers and sisters, I believe we all have the opportunity to be powerfully transformed. We are coming ...

Not to convert, but to be converted. Conversion means change, and often in today's world convert means to be changed in terms of our fuel. (We speak of converting from gas to electric, or from coal to oil, for example.) As Westerners, we are fueled by many things we're hardly aware of - domination, patronization, superiority, speed, conquest, accomplishment. What would happen if we experienced conversions in some or all of these areas? What might God do in us through our experience together?

Theology on Tap

2007-01-10T09:05:00.000-05:00

Trinitas will be hosting a theology on tap at the Vortex in Little Five Points next Thursday (January 18th) @ 8:00. The topic for this month's conversation will be 'Moving Outside the God Box.' We'll be talking about the many ways in which people in general have put limits upon God and how those notions intersect with our own lived experiences. I'll be leading the conversation with my friend, Johnny C. Johnny is a sharp thinker; his keen wit and wry sense of humor will add tremendously to the scope of our conversation. Since I will have no way of knowing how many of you are planning to attend, it would be helpful if you could drop me an email if you are. Peace.

Embrace the Mystery

2006-12-27T10:11:00.000-05:00

“What you say God is, is not true; but what you do not say God is, that is true.”

--Meister Eckhart

Our words fall short; we cannot locate locutions to elucidate the Lord. Another way of saying this is: "God transcends our definitions, our delineations, our delusions." We must resist the urge, however robust or feeble, to confine that which is ineffable with the fetters of fallible human reasoning.

When we profess, "God is love," we must, simultaneously, confess that we do not have our epistemological lariat fully around love's neck. Even if we did somehow fumble blindly upon a roped scruff, we would be like a boy holding a dragon's leash. Who's really in control? Love is slippery and relative and bigger than our words. We know what love is like, and we may know how love feels but we do not know love in any ontological sense.

Likewise, our pious confession that God is good is less than true because we cannot grasp the profundity of goodness. Like the child who pleads, grasping for truth, for answers: "Daddy, how pretty is yellow? how small is one? how tasty is peanut butter?" Before such questions we stumble and stammer and evade. The truth is this: God is not good in the way you think God is good and God's goodness supersedes the cognitive value you have placed upon the word. The experience of a shadow's cool is not stymied by ignorance of the shadow caster. Just let go.

Please! Confess that God is love; profess that God is good. But do not mistake that which is mysterious with those things that can me known; embrace the mystery, don't try to control it.

Did the Virgin Birth Really Happen?

2006-12-20T11:56:00.000-05:00

This season, with scores and scores of other Christ-followers, I will be singing the Christmas classic: Silent Night. "Silent Night; Holy Night. All is calm; all is bright. Round yon virgin, mother and child..." Wait a sec . . . did I just sing virgin; do I really believe that a virgin can be a mother? Such a question is hardly novel; if one added up all of the pages typed trying either to substantiate Jesus' virgin birth or dismiss it, the total is enough to give one carpal tunnel just by fathoming it. So, do you really believe in the virgin birth? In other words, do you hold that these events that the Bible narrates actually occurred as real, historical events?

The dilemma is found in the question. Outside of the Text itself, we have no epistemological access to the events surrounding Jesus' birth; we have no historically verifiable or trustworthy witness independent of the Gospel stories. Therefore, if we are asking for truth in the sense of empirical data that actually happened in space and time, we will have a sad Christmas, for that gift will remain absent from under our yule tree.

Continue Reading
A brief history lesson: at the pinnacle of the enlightenment the biblical narrative was separated from it's meaning. For 1700 years, Christ-followers were content to aver that the Bible means what it says. So when Luke's Gospel maintains, "The virgin's name was Mary," people actually believed that the Text meant what it said. However, like the deep-red ring of plastic encircling the circumference of a piece of bologna, the narrative was eventually discarded as an inedible casing that needed to be gotten around, at best, or thrown away, at worst.

Beginning with the German biblical scholar Reimarus, scholars started searching for external evidence (e.g. eye-witness accounts) that might validate the stories found in the Gospels. This launched a new discipline within biblical studies that would later be called "The Quest for the Historical Jesus." Finding none, the liberal scholars in 18th and 19th Century Europe came to view the narratives - including the virgin birth account - as myths that did not refer to any reality in the real world. They were deemed fictional accounts that were crafted to connect with some existential need present within the communities in which these myths were proclaimed. The bottom line, however, was simple: the stories we find in the Bible refer to something outside of themselves and that referent is fictional.

The conservatives did not sit idle while the liberals systematically dissected their Jesus; they fought back with vigor. Employing the methodologies of the liberals, the conservatives went to great lengths to validate the historicity of biblical events, substantiate the reality of miracles, and bolster the claims of Jesus' messiahness and divinity. They were not content to take the Bible at its word, they sought proof.

The technical term for this move made by both liberals and conservatives is called "ostensive reference." What it means is this: these scholars maintained that the Bible pointed to some external referent being delineated by the Text. Theologian Hans Frei is helpful here. He writes, “The truth to which we refer we cannot state apart from the biblical language which we employ to do so. And belief in the divine authority of Scripture is for me simply that we do not need more.” What Frei is doing here is monumental. He is taking the lot of 18th-20th Century theologians and biblical scholars to task for separating the biblical narratives from their meaning.

Frei effectively dismantles the modernist penchant for severing narrative reference from its referents and thereby obviates the necessity to situate the Bible’s meaning with its ostensive reference or with mythical reorientation. Subsequently, his realistic narrative enables the restoration—via figural interpretation—of the unity of the cannon. These two subtle shifts allow him to make the argument that the Bible is no mere record of historical facts (or propositional truths), yet its history-like narratives render a unified “real world” that the reader is called by faith to accept. Frei writes, “The emphasis in figural interpretation of the bible is on the whole putatively temporal sequence narrated, and on the fact that inclusion in it shapes into one story the whole set of independent biblical stories covering its chronological sequences” (28). His work opens the channels of history whereby the “old realistic sensibility… in which the narrative itself rendered a world at once real and meaningful, which was [inseparable from] the narrative, while serving also to orient men’s dispositions” (156).

Elsewhere Frei notes:

[I]f one speaks in terms of “reference” to a subject matter described—a complex, perhaps confused, perhaps indispensable way of speaking—then there is not a split reference to the described subject matter. The text means what it says, and so the reader’s redescription is just that, a redescription and not the discovery of the text as symbolic representation of something else more profound. (44)

So our initial question, 'Did the virgin birth really happen?' is the wrong question to ask, if by this we are seeking some extra-biblical, empirically verifiable referent that might bolster the Text's witness. This inappropriately severs the narratives we find in the first chapters of Matthew and Luke from their meaning. The Text says that Jesus was born of a virgin and given what I know about Jesus' life and ministry I'm willing to affirm that this is exactly what the Text means. How 'bout you?

I leave you with a final word, again from Frei. Merry Christmas!

But now if you go on from there and say, ‘What about the historical facts here?’ – what facts? Do we know what the facts are outside of the description? Remember what facts were for the empiricists: facts for the empiricist were always those separate occurrences, quite apart from the description, quite apart from the story itself – those separate historical, empirical occurrences which could be confirmed or disconfirmed by independent evidence. What are the facts that are being referred to here? They are facts that we cannot have apart from the story. That is precisely one of the most important things about a realistic interpretation of the Gospels. I’ll put it in the words of a modern English philosopher who said, ‘We have reality only under a description.’ We have this reality only as it is rendered under the description, only as it is rendered by this narrative. It is as though the Bible, especially the Gospel story… were a genuine narrative, the reality of which is not rendered by anything other than the description itself – the reality of which is indeed rightly called I think, for Christians, true fact, but rightly called true fact in a way which, although it may bear a family resemblance to that set of empirical facts we call history, is not identical with it. (from an unpublished speech entitled, "On Interpreting the Christian Story," 50-1)

The Santaland Diaries

2006-12-19T22:28:00.000-05:00

Tonight Abby and I had dinner with our friends Scott and Debra and we made a new friend, Jack. After dinner in L5P, Scott and Debra led us to the Horizon Theater where we saw the hilarious holiday satire, The Santaland Diaries. The play was written by David Sedaris, the frequent NPR guest and bestselling author of Me Talk Pretty One Day. It was a great night.

I highly recommend The Santaland Diaries to give you a hearty holiday chuckle. The play is a sarcastic and insightful Christmas consumer commentary; wherein a man hired at Macy's as one of Santa's elves reflects on his holiday of embarrassing costumes, lewd coworkers, ridiculous customers, and self-medicating bosses. Brilliant!

Faith and Politics

2006-12-15T09:57:00.000-05:00

I just finished leading a 6-week community discussion for Trinitas, focused on Jim Wallis's best-selling book God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It. The liveliness of the conversation ebbed and flowed as the weeks progressed, but nearly everyone who participated affirmed Wallis's central thesis: our bipartisan system of politics in America has created an unnecessary fissure in the public arena--one can either be Republican and pro-life, pro-war, anti-poor, anti-gay, and pro-faith, or Democrat and pro-choice, pro-poor, pro-affordable health care, pro-gay, anti-war, and anti-faith. The dichotomy is not only unhelpful, but also disastrous for America.

A few weeks ago I had the opportunity to hear Jim Wallis speak. I was curious to see how the perspectives he espoused in God's Politics might have changed since he wrote the book in 2004. As I suspected, Wallis was positive, hopeful, and prophetic. He noted that even democrats who wish to remain comfortably within the "secular camp" feel welcomed into the moral values conversation. Wallis avered that the country is hungry for a moral center that really addresses issues rather than using gays or the poor as pawns in a game of political chess. Wallis maintained that the Right still gets it wrong, but that conservatives are leaving the Religious Right in droves in search of a political platform that is geared toward a politics of action rather than that of complaint or blame. I was encouraged and glad to see the tides changing.

Today I read in this article that Hillary Clinton, one of the front runners for the 2008 democratic nomination, has recently hired a faith consultant to help her give a public voice to her moral convictions. In speaking of her faith, those close to Senator Clinton insist-as the old Prego pasta sauce commercials used to say--"It's in there!" If that is true, and not just some cloned political strategy purloined from the Karl Rove play book, it needs to be visible come Iowa. Peace.

Naming Grace

2006-12-08T12:54:00.000-05:00

Naming Grace is a great display of homiletics as practical theology. At every bend in the road, Hilkert is engaging with theologians and philosophers (primarily Ricoeur and, to a lesser degree, Gadamer) to buttress her homiletical proposition that preaching ought to be about recognizing and naming grace in our world that is marred by the realities of corporate and individual sin. Despite the critiques of her work that I offer in my review below, this is a fine, highly readable, and engaging work, one that I found both illuminating and challenging.

Here is the full text of a review that I wrote recently of Mary Catherine Hilkert's book, Naming Grace. Enjoy.

A Boschian Reminder

2006-12-06T13:38:00.000-05:00

Bosch (377-8)

Speaking of the Church…

1. “The Church cannot be viewed as the ground of mission, it cannot be considered the goal of mission either-certainly not the only goal.”
2. “The Church is not the kingdom of God. The church ‘is, on earth, the seed and beginning of the kingdom,’ ‘the sign and instrument of the reign of God that is to come.’ The church can be a credible sacrament [or sign] of salvation for the world only when it displays to humanity a glimmer of God’s imminent reign—a kingdom of reconciliation, peace, and new life.”
3. “The Church’s missionary involvement suggests more than calling individuals into the church as a waiting room for the hereafter.”
4. “The Church is to be viewed pneumatologically, as ‘a dwelling place of God in the Spirit,’ as movement of the Spirit toward the world en route to the future.”
5. “If the Church attempts to sever itself from involvement in the world and if its structures are such that they thwart any possibility of rendering a relevant service to the world, such structures have to be recognized as heretical.”
6. “Because of its integral relatedness to the world, the church may never function as a fearful border guard, but always as one who brings good tidings.”

A (re)read of Bosch is never wasted time!

Defining Postcolonialism

2006-12-05T13:53:00.000-05:00

I'm working on a definition of postcolonialism that is both accessible and perspicacious for a fund raising enterprise to benefit Amahoro Africa. Here's some of my thinking at the moment. I welcome feedback and nuance.

Colonialism: a system of racialized and/or gendered constructs that maintain various forms of control over another national or ethnic entity.

Neo-colonialism: a tragic trend resulting from the impact of global capitalism whereby new forms of control and domination supplant displaced political hegemonies, preponderantly by means of economic leverage.

Postcolonialism: an intentional, self-critical, other-sensitive modus operandi of pressing those in power beyond the unconscious or deliberate tendencies toward economic, political, cultural and religious hegemony.

Postdenominationalism? Postinstitutionalism?

2006-11-27T10:04:00.000-05:00

The ABC's General Board voted nearly unanimously Nov. 14 to sell the ABC-USA Mission Center in Valley Forge, near Philadelphia. Of those present, 72 voted in favor of a recommendation from the board's executive committee to begin the process. There was one abstention, according to the American Baptist News Service.

"In this time of transition for all denominations in our culture, to let go of this symbol is a dramatic sign of our opening ourselves to the new thing God is doing in our midst," said Roy Medley, the denomination's general secretary, according to the service. You can read more about this here. I say, "Go ABC! Good decision." What do you think? Peace.

North Carolina Sucks...

2006-11-15T09:00:00.001-05:00

...well, at least the messengers at the North Carolina Baptist State Convention who approved this policy change! I am deeply saddened by the fundamentalist oppression that is shrouding my former state of residence in a sepulcher of fascism. Thank God that this organization is still a significant presence in the state. This is sad day for Baptists everywhere. To those North Carolina residents who are still free and faithful, remember: illegitemati non carbarundum. Peace.

European Reflections (Part 3)

2006-11-02T09:25:00.000-05:00

Our next stop on the European Emergent tour was with two leaders from the Ikon community in Belfast. We had coffee with Pete Rollins and Johnny McGuan and the conversation that transpired was illuminating.

The Ikon community was birthed out of philosophical reflection that transpired in the mind of Ikon’s founder, Pete Rollins. As a doctoral student enmeshed in post-structuralist philosophy, he was looking for a theological outlet to bolster his philosophical reflection. Before a gathering ever materialized, Pete decided that the location should be the Menagerie, a very dark and dirty pub in a back alley of Belfast. He wanted to create a space that was not separate from the world. Following an impromptu conversation with his French tutor, Pete approached the Menagerie’s owner about the possibility of having church at his pub. After a pregnant pause, the owner indicated that they were on in 3 weeks time. There was, therefore, no pre-planning of Ikon. They did not do any demographic studies or focus groups. To Pete’s surprise, 50 people showed up at their first gathering, all of who seemed to come from nowhere. Johnny was present at the first gathering.
Continue Reading
Theirs is an ecumenical gathering, which blurs the Catholic/Protestant line so utterly present in Northern Ireland’s recent history. Since many of Ikon’s participants are involved in various reconciliation movements for their jobs, they have opted to created a space that gets around the catholic/protestant issue.

Ikon draws from the extremes of theology. They are not a church in the traditional sense. In other words, Ikon is not a place one goes to find doctrine. In fact, Ikon, as an organization, has no doctrinal position on anything, but individuals do. As a result, our conversation with Pete and Johnny took on a different shape from typically transpires from a gathering of pastors.

One of the emphases of Ikon, which abounds in Pete’s book, How (Not) to Speak of God, is a moving away from right belief (orthodoxy) and right action (orthopraxy) to believing and behaving in the right way. Pete explained to me that they are more concerned with following the trajectory of love and liberation left in the wake of God’s continual in-breaking into human history than to halt that inertia by pinning down a set belief or doctrine at any one moment. As a result, they are always being deconstructed by themselves and have embraced this failing dimension of their community’s existence.

Half of Ikon is theory and the other half is experiential praxis. Their work is not just an intellectual exercise. Some psychologists who participate in their community, however, have noted that Ikon gatherings tend to take the form of theological therapy.

At Ikon, they embody space in a public arena. People can shout or otherwise interrupt the gathering. Drunken people sometimes interfere and are incorporated into the dynamism of the situation. This uncontrolled, messy and open environment is life-giving to the Ikon community. They have no membership; it’s a crowd. And nobody, not even the organizers, endorse everything that goes on. Pete mentioned that Ikon doesn't care about anyone. He did quickly add that, hopefully, the person sitting next to you cares.

Ikon is made up of a mixture of different people:
30%-happy with church
30-40%-have left church and are on the fringe
30-40%-no church, but spiritual

Ironically many YWAM folks who serve in Belfast are very supportive of Ikon. Most of them are young Americans who are finding it liberating to explore new ground in this way.

Ikon’s five guiding coordinates are: ikonic, apocalyptic, heretical, emerging, and failing.
Pete and Johnny see their work as ikonic in direct contradistinction from idolatry, which captures the essence of something. An Ikon, in contradistinction, points to the invisible without possessing it. Pete noted that they are not trying to tear down the church artifice so they can rebuild something else. Nor are they like archeologists trying to find a treasure. They are failing to the extent that they will never arrive and have it figured out because they are always falling short.

In the mean time, Ikon is striving to create a place to express themselves through corporate innovation and philosophical reflection. Pete concluded our conversation by quoted Meister Eckhart: God is continually speaking life into the void. At Ikon, nihilism, death, deconstruction, and space makes room for life.

Holy Ground

2006-10-30T13:36:00.000-05:00

Beginning this week, we will be creating space for biblical reflection and contemplative prayer as a community. This weekly gathering will be held on Tuesday nights starting at 7pm at Jake and Abby's house in Grant Park. We will be practicing lectio divina from the Gospel of Luke.

Join us for an evening of spiritual reflection, prayer and pragmatic conversation as we explore this rich book together.

Email Jake for directions.

Books and Beans

2006-10-30T13:32:00.000-05:00

Join us Thursdays at 8:oo PM at Grandma Luke's Coffee Shop in Little Five Points at the corner of Moreland and Euclid Aves. for an invigorating book discussion, some great coffee and dessert.
Our current book discussion is centered on Jim Wallis', God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It. You can read a review of Wallis' book, which originally appeared in The Nation, here.

Schedule

November 2nd--Part 1: Changing the Wind
November 9th--Part 2: Moving Beyond the Politics of Complaint
November 16th--Part 3: Spiritual Values and International Relations
November 23rd--NO GATHERING (Eat Some Turkey Instead)
November 30th--Part 4: Spiritual Values and Economic Justice
December 7th--Part 5: Spiritual Values and Social Values
December 14th--Part 6: Spiritual Values and Social Change

Trinitas

2006-10-30T09:32:00.000-05:00

Despite a few kinks that need to be ironed out with the website, Trinitas, the church-plant I am coordinating in Little Five Points, is a go! After a year of listening and observing--over many beers, hands of Texas Hold'em, and cups of coffee--I now have a vision for what a community of faith following God in the way of Jesus might look like in and around this uber-eclectic bohemian neighborhood in the heart of Atlanta. Only now, having become sufficiently enmeshed in this culture, do I feel that I may offer a hopeful vision of "church" to my new friends and acquaintances.

As the months unfold I will keep you all informed of new developments to Think/Pray/Serve/Be with us at Trinitas. Peace.

European Reflections (Part 2)

2006-10-24T14:44:00.000-05:00

The second stop over on my European tour was in Copenhagen, Denmark. I met with two brothers, Thomas and Simon Willer who are starting a church in the center of the city called Re:Gen. I picked the Willer brothers as conversation partners because I felt that their ministry to the de-churched in Copenhagen would form a close parallel with the type of ministry I envision in the Little Five Points area of Atlanta.

Thomas and Simon are sons of a Baptist minister—a rarity in Denmark, which hosts only 5000 Baptists and around 35 members per church. After assessing the sociological situation carefully (Thomas is a sociologist by training), they desired to create a missional space that could facilitate Christian community in a manner that was relevant to the culture. They are trying to create a church that emerges into culture in an authentic way (i.e. in a way that is not contrived or coerced). This means that the church really listens to the hopes, dreams and ideas of those in the culture and reciprocates with a voice of its own back into the culture.

Re:gen gathers weekly in a hip, trendy bar that also hosts a nightclub on Friday and Saturday nights. When they arrive on Sunday afternoons to set up for their Sunday PM gathering, others will be there just to hang out or grab a beer. They are transforming secular space into holy space by their presence in that bar. The conviction of the Willer brothers is that they are merely furthering the work that God is already doing in culture. God has already been at work among the people of Copenhagen and they are facilitating a space where those God-seeds can grow.

In his master’s thesis, Thomas conducted research about the longevity of church attendance from youth who are brought up in church. He discovered that less than 50% of those who are actual church goers (b/w 2-6% of the Danish population!) will still attend church when they are 25. This is largely due, by Thomas’ estimation, to an inability for churchgoers to bridge the realties of church with that which they experience outside of church. The church environment that they experience constitutes such a radical disconnect from their ‘secular’ culture that they eventually stop attending church altogether. As an ancillary result, many who remain within church culture tend to batten down the hatches as a defense against culture and the chasm continues to widen. The church that Simon and Thomas are planting seeks to narrow the gulf between church culture and ‘secular’ culture.

Five Guys comes to L5P!!!!

2006-10-17T12:24:00.000-05:00

This is the best burger you will find in Atlanta! Period.

European Reflections (Part 1)

2006-10-17T12:19:00.000-05:00

My first stop over in Europe was in Weimar, Germany with a phenomenal missionary couple, Rick and Nancy Dill. The Dills have served on mission in Germany for over 25 years and the fecundity of their work in Weimar is palpable. Rick and Nancy first sensed a calling to foreign missions as they were making the move to work with youth at Wieuca Road Baptist Church (the church where I currently serve as Coordinator for Missional Community). After three years at Wieuca, they made the transition and they and their two daughters crossed the Atlantic in obedience to God’s call upon their lives.

After working in Wiesbaden with singles for a number of years, the Dills moved to Weimar to plant a new church right after the Berlin Wall had fallen. What Rick and Nancy found there was quite interesting. Since Weimar was under the Soviet controlled area of Germany, the communist resistance to religion had made its presence known among its residents. Very few people had any interest in organized religion and a mere handful of followers had gathered through the fifty-year communist dominance for corporate worship. Into this anti-religion biased culture came Rick and Nancy.

Their ministry was frustrated a bit by the state church of Germany (the Lutheran Church) when the communist regime ended. The first thing that the state church did to welcome their estranged comrades back into the unified country was to reinstitute the church tax. You need not strain to imagine how the residents of Weimar received this exciting news.

Nevertheless, Rick and Nancy set about their work. Their ministry has been thoroughly indigenous. The Dill family is fluent in German (i.e. they immersed themselves in the language of the local culture). Rick even preaches in German and he has so committed himself to his language study that one can hardly detect a foreign accent. As one who has studied German, I appreciate the difficulty of this task.

The church that the Dills planted is First Baptist Church of Weimar. Their fellowship has grown to over 200 members. Rick explained to me that in the German church context, where less than 6% of the population frequents a church on any given month, FBC Weimar is a mega church. Their church is built upon relationships, not flashy church-growth strategies. As I strolled through the historic area of the city with Rick and Nancy, I was amazed at the number of people whom they new on a first-name basis. It seemed as if every street we passed brought new people who were rushing forward to greet Rick or Nancy.

What I take away from this visit for my Atlanta ministry context is that there is no substitute for quality, authentic relationships. It is imperative that church leaders understand the culture in which they are ministering and have immersed themselves in the language. A hearty smile and a contagious laugh have the power to break through the most resistant and withdrawn people. And only by drawing members of the indigenous culture into the workings of church will the product resonate with people for whom the church is suspect.

What a difference 20lbs makes!

2006-10-17T12:16:00.000-05:00

My Office

2006-10-17T12:12:00.000-05:00

Adam's is cleaner.

Back in the USA (again)

2006-10-10T07:19:00.000-05:00

I'm back again. Mexico was wonderful. We had a great experience working as a team and, despite a few nasty cases of Montezuma's revenge and some last minute drama of taking our pastor to the hospital because of food poisoning, all was well. Our team of 15 constructed a 12x24' house for a family of three (Alejandro, Carolina and their daughter, Alejandra). This was my first time building with cinderblock and mortar and I have come to realize how much more difficult that construction medium is from working with wood. The days were hot and the sweat flowed as if from a leaky faucet. And I loved every minute of it. If you or your church is ever interested in forming a new missions partner, I highly recommend Ministerio de Fey/Faith Ministry in Reynosa, Mexico. Check out some photos here.

I'm glad to be back with my beautiful pregnant wife and in my own bed:) Peace

I love my friends

2006-09-29T21:33:00.000-05:00

Back in the USA (at least for a while)

2006-09-27T12:32:00.000-05:00

On Monday I returned from my two-week sojourn through Europe and the UK, meeting with Emergent leaders and communities. I will unfold my reflections over the next few weeks. This is a fast and dirty overview.

The first week I was accompanied by my great friend, Jason. He met me in Atlanta and we flew to Berlin for the first part of our trip. It was fun for me to visit my old haunts in Berlin (Abby and I lived there in 2004). Berlin is a wonderful city and it was neat to see how the city had changed in 2 years. The second day I took a four hour train ride to Weimar to visit with Rick and Nancy Dill, a missionary couple that my church has supported for the last 25 years. They were wonderful people and, despite my knee-bending jet lag, I had a great time. On Day 3, Jason and I traveled up to Copenhagen where we met with Thomas and Simon Willer. I got to visit Kierkegaard's grave, which was a solemn experience, and on the next day I got a new tattoo. Day 5 found us in Dublin where I visited St. Patrick's Cathedral, the Book of Kells exhibit at Trinity College, and I made a haaj to the Mecca of all beer sanctuaries...the Guiness factory.

On Day 6 Jason headed back to the states and Michael, the senior pastor of my church met me for the secon leg of the journey. We worshiped that Sunday with Jason Clark's community, Vineyard Sutton. On Day 7 we flew up to Belfast to meet with Pete Rollins and Johnny McGuen (sp?) from Ikon. Later that afternoon we took a train up to Coleraine where we hooked up with Si Johnston. The next day we traveled over to Manchester to meet up with Ben Edson. That evening we worshiped with Sanctus 1 in the city center of Manchester. On Day 9 we flew back to London and met with Kester Brewin at a Greek restaurant. On Day 10 we met with Jonny Baker for a Thai lunch and then Steve Collins for an English dinner. The next day Michael had to fly back to the states to do a wedding. I had a few days to relax in which I read two books, Franz Kafka's, The Trial and Scot McNight's new book, A Community Called Atonement. Last Sunday I worshiped with Vineyard Sutton and met with Jason Clark for lunch. That evening I worship with Garreth over at Moot. Then I passed the 9 hour flight back home by reading John Caputto's monograph, Philosophy and Theology.

I have a week to spend with Abby and recover and then I lead a mission trip to Mexico next week. Peace.

European Emergent Tour

2006-09-11T11:21:00.000-05:00

I leave today for a two-week emergent tour through Germany, Denmark, England and Ireland. I will be back to the states on 9/25. Pray for me as I travel! Peace.

On No Excuses

2006-09-10T16:12:00.000-05:00

It is September 10th. Exactly 12 weeks since I set my goal of losing 20 pounds. Booo-ya, baby!

My Baby's First Photo

2006-09-09T16:08:00.000-05:00

Abby and I went in for our ultrasound yesterday. The baby is healthy with all the right number of fingers and toes. It was an amazing experience! At one point during the appointment the doctor focused in on our baby's face and we caught her yawning. Yes, we are having a little girl. We are naming her Taylor Marie. So that means I have 20 weeks to figure out how to be a father. Any tips? Peace.

So, I Guess I'm Schizophrenic

2006-09-05T14:14:00.000-05:00

I had a three-way tie on my Enneagram test. Any guesses as to which description fits my personality best? If you know me, this is one you should comment on. Peace.

The Richmond Conversation

2006-08-30T09:13:00.000-05:00

Last Thursday, Mike Lewis and I facilitated a helpful discussion in Richmond, VA about CBF church planting with an Emergent ethos. We had around 25 people in attendance and the crowd was diverse. We joined with Bo Prosser, Coordinator for Congregational Life at CBF, to converse a bit about how the emergent conversation is connected with the missional church movement. I explained that every emergent church is by definition missional, but not every missional church is Emergent. We had other members of CBF leadership in attendance as well, including Rick Bennett (the associate coordinator for congregational life), Phil Hester (the coordinator for new church starts) Jeremy Lewis (the program manager for the CBF rural poverty initiative), Rick Clore (coordinator for Virginia CBF), Frank Broome (coordinator for CBF of Georgia), and Linda Jones (the missions coordinator for North Carolina CBF). We also had many potential and burgeoning church planters there.

Based on the initial feelers we put out, we discovered that an overview of the Emergent Conversation was necessary; both to clear the murky waters and to help curb misconceptions that some had espoused. Throughout our week in Richmond, Mike and I had heard Emergent compared to the Willow Creek/contemporary model. We tried to explain that Emergent is not a model, theres no kit one can buy to plant an emergent church. Rather, those taking the initiative to plant indigenous, organic, missional communities of faith who are also a part of the emergent conversation do so in culturally particular ways to fit their host community.

Some people present at the Richmond conversation expressed some of the standard worries expressed by evangelicals who are afraid that EV doesnt believe in absolute truth and that we are universalists. When this started, a beautiful thing occurred: the CBF leadership engaged these dissenting voices with vigor. While our digression into topics of soteriology and epistemology were lamentable, I was proud to be a part of a fellowship that had already significantly wrestled with these concepts and were able to offer a response. I think the title of one of Brians books, More Ready than You Realize, is apropos for CBF. It was a good talk and I look forward to the next venue for good beer and good conversation.

BTW: As I was exiting the Capital Ale House after our gathering, I heard a familiar voice call my name. To my surprise it was Corey Widmer, a colleague of mine at PTS and an all around great guy. He is serving as the Associate Minister for Outreach and Evangelism in Richmond. Small world!

Pete the Binary Slayer

2006-08-25T08:26:00.000-05:00

While on vacation, I read one of the best books yet coming out of the emergent conversation. Pete Rollins’ book, How (Not) to Speak of God, is now being moved to my Jake Recommends list and will from now on be on my list of book recommendations to emergent seekers who contact me. Below, I would like to share a few of my impressions in order to persuade you to read the book for yourself. I’m sure that Pete would appreciate you buying the book rather than me telling you all of the details. So, I would like to share with you what I perceive he is up to in this book.
Continue reading...
Rollins offers us a thoroughgoing postcolonial theology; however, not in the traditional sense of the phrase. Instead, he is trying to move us away from the hegemony of our god-language and the dogmatic ideologies that enslave us (i.e. from the language that colonizes God!). Pete’s eclectic a/theology is a witty blend of postmodern mysticism coupled with an existential pragmatism. Throughout the book, he weaves the suggestion that a hermeneutic of love ought to be the regula fidae of emerging Christianity. I can think of no better rule of faith.

Like Derrida, Rollins is amply aware of the limits of language. Apropos, he is constantly bringing words under erasure (ex. a/theology is a concept connoting both the death of “traditional theology” while at the same time giving life to a new rendering of theological reflection in the aftermath of God). Even his title—How (Not) to Speak of God—is a playful, de/constructive twist that subverts our preconceived ideas about God language.
Like Levinas, he otherwises the hegemony of language. Like both writers, he plays with language as a cat plays with a ball of string

Rollins is trying to move us beyond traditional conceptions of orthodoxy (right belief) and orthopraxy (right action) to believing and acting in the right way. This is not mere wordplay, but is a crucial distinction. He says more plainly than most, that deconstruction is not something that we do to texts, rituals, institutions, etc. Rather, it is something that they do to themselves. For instance, he writes:

[T]hose involved in the [emergent] conversation are not explicitly attempting to construct or unearth a different set of beliefs that would somehow be more appropriate in today’s context, but rather, they are looking at the way in which we hold the beliefs that we already have. This is not then a revolution that seeks to change what we believe, but rather one that sets about transforming the entire manner in which we hold our beliefs. (7)

One of the best things about Rollins’ book is his advocating for a tertium quid out of the either/or thinking spurred by proponents of modernity. And this third way transcends a mere both/and approach, but dialectically subsumes both terms. To this extent, Rollins takes his rightful place next to the great binary slayers of history: Socrates, Jesus and Kierkegaard.

To name but a few examples, Rollins bridges the Kantian chasm between perception and knowledge. He also presses us to rethink theology as being either a priori or a posteriori and God as the object of our theologizing or theology as the aftermath of God, who is the eternal subject. He slashes the binaries of journey/destination, revelation/concealment and reflection/experience. Check out this quote:

Yet in reality the Christian God destroys the idea of immanence and transcendence as opposite points in a diffuse spectrum, replacing this with the idea that immanence and transcendence are one and the same point: God remains transcendent amidst immanence precisely because God remains concealed amidst revelation. (24-5)

Rollins' a/theistic approach (emergent approach) puts words behind a form of "disbelieving what one believes, or rather, believing in God while remaining dubious concerning what one believes about God" (26). This a/theism makes the point that faith is found in the uncomfortable oscillation between understanding and ignorance, because "our reflections on God never bring us to God” (32).

He wants our a/theology to resist hypostasis or comfortability. Instead, he presses us to live in the unpleasant position of true faith—undecidability. This derridian liminal space forces us to embrace doubt as a necessary component of faith and undecidability as the nexus of authentic decision.

Rollin's book is a helpful guide as we journey on this path we call postmodern Christianity. His book is akin to this statement he makes about Emergent Village worldwide: “the emerging community must endeavor to be a question rather than an answer and an aroma rather than a food” (42). Read this book! It is worth every penny of the $13.57 you would spend on it at Amazon and so much more.

CBF Emergence Coming to Richmond

2006-08-16T14:02:00.000-05:00

The last few venues in which we discussed issues of emergence within CBF have gone extremely well. The Atlanta meeting served as a general overview of some of the salient points of similarity between CBF and EV. The Chattanooga gathering led us into a more in-depth treatment of an emerging vision of hope that many of us see within the Fellowship. Now I would like to invite any and all who are interested to a third gathering that will surpass the others both in specificity and casualness.

Mike Lewis, a church planter in Hoover, AL, was a strong contributor at the Chattanooga gathering. There he expressed his passion for church planting and his desire to facilitate new church start initiatives. Mike was also one of several key CBF leaders who participated in a meeting hosted in Nashville last May to discuss the possibilities of "forging a church-starts culture within the national CBF movement." That meeting, which included leaders from four state CBF groups as well as the national Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, was an essential first step toward fueling such a culture. Those of us within CBF who are also a part of the emergent conversation see hope materializing on the horizon in the form of a potential partnership between the two organizations. That hope, for me, is most poignant in the area of new church starts.

Next week, Mike and I will both be participating in a Church Planters Boot Camp hosted at the Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond. For those of you who might find yourself at this boot camp, live within the Richmond area, or are willing to drive there, you are welcome to meet Mike and I at the Capital Ale House to chat about planting emergent communities in partnership with CBF. This gathering is open to inquisitors from both sides. In other words, we welcome those of you who are a part of the emergent conversation and want to explore the possibilities of participating in the church starts culture being generated within the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship. Likewise, this conversation will serve as a forum for exploration for those of you who have found a comfortable space under the CBF umbrella and would like to explore the fecundity of the emergent conversation from your context.

We will be meeting at the pub around 8:00 PM on Thursday, August 24. Feel free to email me if you have any questions. Additionally, we will need to call ahead for reservations if we have more than 8 people, so if you would like to attend please let me know. Peace.

Back to Work

2006-08-16T08:35:00.001-05:00

Vacation was wonderful. Lots of sun. Lots of cold coronas. Time with the family. It was great! We spent three days in Jacksonville with my family and high school friends and five days with Abby's parents down on Long Key. While we were in the Keys we also took some day trips down to Key West (I had my second cheeseburger in paradise @ Margarittaville...HEAVEN!) and Isla Mirada. One day we snorkeled on a boat my father-in-law rented and got to swim with an enormous sea turtle.

I also had lots of time to kick back and relax. I read Pete Rollins' excellent new book, How (Not) to Speak of God. (I'll post a review of it later.) I even got a chance to do a bit of running over the bridges down there. That was important because it helped to offset the Key Lime Pies, beers, fried calamari, and lobster that I indulged in. Last night when we returned I stepped back on the scale with trepidation and discovered that I had gained 4 pounds. Not too bad for a post-vacation weigh in. That means I'll need to really kick it in the ass to lose 9 pounds by my 9/11 deadline. Now I get to catch up on all of the work that I missed while I was away. Peace.

Ahh, Vacation At Last

2006-08-06T18:17:00.000-05:00

Tomorrow morning we leave for a much needed vacation. With Abby's hectic school schedule, tomorrow begins a 9 day window between summer school, her graduate research assistantship and the Fall semester. We'll be heading down to the Florida Keys for some R & R for five days and then back up to Jacksonville to spend some time with family and friends.

As you may have figured out by the paucity of my posts as of late, I've been pretty much running on fumes for the last few weeks. I am looking forward to some time away to recharge and play in the Florida sun. Hopefully, I'll come back with some more stuff to blog about. Peace.

Chattanooga Gathering

2006-08-02T08:29:00.000-05:00

Sorry it's taken me so long to post about this meeting last week. What can I say? Life is busy.

A group of about 18 folks gathered in Chattanooga last Thursday to converse about Emergent Village and CBF. Mike Young, of Tennessee CBF, facilitated the conversation. The gathering was comprised of a wide variety of people who are all connected in some way to EV and CBF. We had church planters, CBF employees, PhD candidates, pastors, non-profit workers, ministry residents, a publisher, a journalist and even a chemist coming from three states.

We began the conversation with an overview of the similarities that already exist between EV and CBF. Both groups find value in diversity, foster a loose affiliation centered around four core convictions, are passionate about partnering with like-minded groups to facilitate kingdom work, unequivocally affirm women in ministry, honor trust rather than suspicion, and appreciate fellowship as a kingdom value. There were other comparisons made that I didn't write down.
Continue reading...
Next we delved into a discussion about the differences between CBF and traditional denominational structures. It was very helpful to have people like Bo Prosser there, who played an active role in the formation of CBF. Here is what emerged. One person described CBF as the car we are riding in for missional ministry. We chose to ride in this vehicle as long as it is heading in the right direction. Most CBF folks were fleeing from the control and institutionalism of the SBC. Those who saw that ship sink under fundamentalism have learned not to place their trust in institutions.

CBF seeks to facilitate missional work through partnerships, intentional friendships, and networking. Denominations are controlling, even constricting institutions. They want to keep their thumb on things they support, forever. Not so with CBF. CBF desires to partner with other individuals and groups as peers, regardless of size. So, if denominations can tend to digress into the wicked step mother in Cinderella, CBF is like the genie in Aladdin. In other words, denominations are restricting and constricting institutions while CBF is an enabling and equipping fellowship. One person commented that CBF is constituted by "semi-religious institutionalism, that doesn't want to be institutional." Doctoral candidate and Texas Hold'em aficionado, Eric Barreto, suggested that denominations are about authority and that that authority is manifested in three ways: ideology, cash and institutions. Denominations want to control these things. We all found Eric's points helpful.

Next we discussed the phenomenon of CBF Emergence. Many were in agreement that both CBF and EV gatherings "feel like home." We seek a movement within a fellowship, a humble gathering within a gathering. The passion of many of those attending the Chattanooga conversation was to create intentional space within CBF life for the emergent conversation to emerge. We are interested in facilitating a network within the fellowship. Some even shared their passions for this generative fellowship. Mike Lewis, planter of Fellowship of the Valley in Birmingham, shared his passion for facilitating new church start initiatives. Jon Spencer, pastor of Druid Hills Baptist Church in Atlanta, said that he is passionate about working with traditional pastors who are trying to emerge within established churches. Mike Young shared his passion for connecting people to form dynamic partnerships. My passion is to bring CBF and EV into an official partnership whereby CBF can help fund and support EV initiatives and EV can help educate CBF about kingdom work in this emerging culture.

I thought that the conversation was a wonderful first effort in what I imagine will be an ongoing discussion. Soon I will be working with EV and CBF leadership to broker this partnership. Hopefully, a generative, symbiotic partnership will emerge. Peace.

15 down, 5 to go

2006-07-28T07:23:00.000-05:00

That's right. I'm now weighing in at 170lbs. That means I only have 5 more pounds to lose in order to achieve my goal. I have 6 weeks to do it before my September 10 deadline too. How's everyone else doing on their respective weight loss regimes? Peace.

Atlanta Cohort Conversation

2006-07-26T11:12:00.000-05:00

Last night I facilitated a conversation about the effects of media on persons in general and the church in particular. The discussion was invigorating for me personally and I appreciated how the different perspectives that were expressed colored the discussion. We used Shane Hipps' book, The Hidden Power of Electronic Culture: How Media Shapes Faith, The Gospel, and Church, as a catalyst for discussion. You can read a review of Shane's book here.

Shane elucidates the thesis of his book, or a possible thesis, here. He avers, "The problem comes from a lack of awareness for how media shapes our message in worship. When we ignore the power of the chosen media, its effects often go undetected. As a result, we fail to perceive the unintended consequences of our decisions and the ways our media undermines our message." Throughout the book, Hipps appropriates the social musings of Marshall McLuhan to show the impact of media on the church. At the cohort, I read a few McLuhan quotes to get things started:

McLuhanOur conventional response to all media, namely that it is how they are used that counts, is the numb stance of the technological idiot. The content of a medium is like the juicy piece of meat carried by the burglar to distract the watchdog of the mind."

McLuhanThe content or message of any particular medium has about as much importance as the stenciling on the casing of an atomic bomb.

McLuhan--We shape our tools and afterward our tools shape us."

Continue reading... Here are a few pithy comments offered by Hipps himself:

Relevance does not come simply from imitating culture or mirroring the techniques of Hollywood and Madison Avenue. It does not depend upon the adoption of electronic hardware in worship. Relevance is derived from experimenting with authentic and indigenous practices that emerge from the gift matrix of a particular congregation for a local community (154).

When electronic media are taken to extremes, we become spectators of the gospel rather than participants in the kingdom of God (155).

Incarnational worship is authentic and culturally engaged, prophetic and pastoral, relevant and resistant (157).

One of the helpful ways that Hipps incorporates McLuhan's work into his own is through his appropriation of McLuhan's "Four Laws of Media" to technological inovation in church life. These four questions are crucial if we are to begin to predict the pros and cons of adopting a given medium in the church.

Laws of Media (p. 41-2)
1. What does the medium extend? (ex. telephone-ear/camera-eye)
2. What does the medium make obsolete? (ex. car/horse and buggy)
3. What does the medium reverse into? (ex. car/traffic jams and deaths)
4. What does the medium retrieve? (ex. e-mail/telegraph)

At the cohort last night we were honored to have Andy Stanley with us. Andy is the pastor of the megachurch, Northpoint and his sermons are brodcast to two satelite campuses for Sunday morning worship venues. I thought it might be especially enlightening, given Andy's presence, to use McLuhan's four laws to deconstruct the media and technology employed in the satelite service phenomenon. My attempts at doing so are posted to the right.

Andy did not choose to enagage the conversation on this point. He preferred, by his own admission, to learn from what others were saying. I respect that. Andy commented that he likes Shane's book a lot but also noted that the distinction Hipps makes between McLuhan's contention that "the medium is the message" and Rick Warren's quote, that "Our message must never change, but the way we deliver that message must be constantly updated to reach each new generation" may be an unfair dichotomy. Andy, who does not know Warren personally, thought that Warren would love Shane's book. I find that interesting.

Those of you who have read Hipps' book and/or attended the cohort last night are welcome to chime in on the discussion. Peace.

Momentum

2006-07-20T10:25:00.000-05:00

I'm excited. It looks like we are gaining some momentum.

First I read this article

Now this article.

Moreover, the CBF/Emergent conversation to be held this Thursday, July 27 at 10:00 a.m. in Chattanooga has outgrown the original venue due to wide-spread interest. Because of the number of people expected, our original coffeshop conversation will no longer be feasible on account of space limitations. Therefore, Mike Young has reserved a meeting room at the Back Inn Café (located in the Bluff View Arts District ). Lunch will be served in our meeting room around noon.

*Please bring cash to pay Mike for your lunch as it will be easier for him to take care of the bill with his credit card.* Lunch will probably run around $10-$15 depending on what you order.

Location:
Back Inn Café (located in the Bluff View Arts District)
412 East Second St., Chattanooga, Tennessee 37403
Ph: (423) 265-5033

If you want to attend and haven't told Mike please call him @ (931)247-4851. I can't wait to see what emerges! Peace.

Inner-city Living

2006-07-19T07:53:00.000-05:00

Abby's car was broken into last week and her cd player was stolen. This happened while she was in class at Georgia State University, which is in the heart of downtown Atlanta. This is the second time that someone has attempted to break into her car. The first time occurred outside our condo and the inept thief was unsuccessful at even getting into the car. S/he, however, did manage to do $1000 worth of damage to the car in his/her failed larceny. Despite these frustrating experiences, I like living in-town. Everyone has tradeoffs. We sacrifice space, a garage, square footage, and safety to live in the city. It does put us as close as we could afford to be to Little Five Points, the focal area for my church plant. It is also only 2 miles from GSU. What is one to do?

This frustrating experience provides impetus to ask you all a question that has been bouncing around in my mind for a month now: how are those of us who are not poor meant to live in relation to those who are? In his, Philosophy of Right, Hegel wrote at length about the poor, whom he called "the rabble." Although Hegel contended that it is the duty of the state to care for every citizen, he was dubious that this will ever actually happen. Hegel was even more doubtful that the poor will be sufficiently cared for by private charity. He concluded that the best way to deal with poverty is to "leave the poor to their fate and direct them to beg from the public" (245).

This was a major point of departure for Marx (a critical Hegelian himself). Marx agreed with Hegel that modern society tends to create an impoverished class, whom he labels "the proletariat." He is optimistic, however, that members of the proletariat possess the means to ameliorate their lot in life. He saw the proletariat as a powerful, creative, revolutionary class whose destiny it is to topple the existing inequitable system. Hegel, by contrast, is altogether pessimistic. He maintained that poverty destroys the sense of self that is necessary for ethical living in society. Poverty, Hegel contends, gives rise to the "non-recognition of right." The "rabble" do not recognize themselves as part of the system, but victims of the system. Hegel therefore held that they fall outside of the bounds of what is right and wrong within the system and have no hope.

So, according to Hegel, the persons who stole Abby's CD player-provided they are in fact living in poverty-have not committed a wrong. Instead, their actions are a result of being forced outside of society and, concurrently, out of the bounds of ethical injunctions. Thanks Hegel! I know that Abby and I feel personally violated and victimized by this theft. Is this just one small dose of a medicine that the poor must choke down everyday? If I fail to care for the poor in my midst (by what means?) have I committed a far greater injustice to those without means to improve their lives, be it by private or governmental relief?

What do you think? When you look at a homeless man or woman do you feel optimistic or pessimistic that they can improve their lot in life? Moreover, do you feel optimistic or pessimistic that our current system in 21st century America provides the means to mitigate poverty and fiscal injustice? Or, are you with Hegel, that the poor should take it on the chin and look for handouts? How, based on your optimism or pessimism, do you relate to the proletariat/the rabble/the poor/the disenfranchised in your midst? Peace.

CBF Emergence//First Gathering

2006-07-17T12:50:00.000-05:00

Okay, so here's the update. Mike Young, Missions Coordinator for TNCBF, will be hosting the first of what we hope will be many conversations among CBFers about the possibilities of a fruitful relationship with Emergent Village. The gathering will be held on Thursday, July 27 in Chattanooga, TN. We will be meeting at Rembrandt's Coffee House at 10:00am, which is in the Bluff View Art District in downtown Chattanooga. We will begin the conversation at Rembrandt's and then let it spill over into lunch at a restaurant downtown. We are planning to end in the early afternoon.

So far, we expect to have Sam and Lynnette Davidson, new church planters in Nashville, along with Scott Cole and Mike Lewis, who co-pastor a new church start in Birmingham. Mike also serves as Coordinator for New Church Starts with ALCBF.

This informal conversation is open to all who are interested in broadening the emergent conversation within CBF life. If you would like to attend please email Mike Young (missions@tncbf.org) so that he will know how many people to expect.

N.B. This will not be the only venue in which we will breach this important topic of discussion. So, if you can't make it to this particular gathering, please do not be alarmed. If you can make it, however, we welcome your participation.

I have room for two more folks in my car if you are in the Atlanta area. Feel free to email me if you need a ride.

The Sri Lankan Peachtree Race

2006-07-14T10:26:00.000-05:00

On July 4, 2006, the three of us who constituted the WRBC Tsunami team carried an Atlanta tradition to the other side of the world, literally. We had been serving in Ambelangoda, Sri Lanka for a week at this point and we were chatting about the Peachtree Road Race, which is held every year in Atlanta on Independence Day. Lamenting the fact that we were not able to celebrate the 4th of July with family and friends, we decided to run the 6.2 miles in solidarity with our brothers and sisters back in Atlanta who were walking, jogging and running thousands of miles away. The torrential rains of late-monsoon season did not deter us, as we completed the 10 K around the time that Atlanta was kicking off its perennial competition.

In an area of the country that does not see a lot of Americans, we drew immediate attention as we jogged through the crowded streets. Our warm smiles and friendly waves elicited commensurate responses from the Sri Lankan onlookers. As we ran through the crowded streets of Ambelangoda, amidst Tuk-Tuks, motorcycles and passenger buses, I felt like we were ambassadors of good will to the people of Sri Lanka. Everybody was smiling and waving as we ran through the villages and countryside. Kids gave us high-fives and everyone wanted to know where we were from. It was an experience I will cherish for years to come. Peace.

10 down, 10 to go

2006-07-11T21:21:00.000-05:00

I was a little leery about stepping on the scale today. After two weeks of minimal exercise in Sri Lanka-save the physical labor we offered-I was afraid that I might have put all of the weight back on. I was pleasantly surprised that I weighed in at 174lbs today. That means I have lost 10 pounds in 4 weeks. I have 7 more weeks to lose the final 10. Anybody else have any exciting weight loss news to report? Peace.

A Hearty Welcome Home

2006-07-10T10:05:00.000-05:00

It's always nice to return from a trip and tentatively check your email inbox only to find 225 messages patiently awaiting your attention. Lots of fun!

After 60 hours of sleep deprivation, I finally returned home from my 2-week sojourn in Sri Lanka on Saturday evening. Despite horrendous flight experiences with Delta and Sri Lankan airlines, we returned safely to Atlanta, relatively unscathed. We survived the torrents of late-monsoon season, three scorpion attacks (or at least they felt like attacks), Tamil Tiger terrorist attacks and kamikaze Tuc-Tuc drivers.

Our team worked with CBF field missionary, Scott Hunter, to build a water filtration system for a newly built village providing housing for 72 families. I'll post some reflections later this week, hopefully. Thank you to all of you who prayed for us while we were away!

A Generative Fellowship, or, Broadening the Conversation

2006-06-23T20:53:00.000-05:00

Today I led a breakout session at the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship General Assembly in muggy Atlanta. The title of my chat was "Beer, Candles and Kierkegaard: CBF and the Emergent Conversation." You can see my Keynote slides here. In my presentation I briefly introduced the salient features of the Emergent Conversation, focusing primarily on the praxis, ecclesiological and theological strands of the discussion. My talk was an explication under a thesis. I wanted to help CBFers to wade through the turbid waters of hearsay about Emergent Village in order to understand the primary facets of this generative friendship. My thesis was that Emergent Village, as a multi-tiered generative friendship of Christ-followers, is a kindred spirit with the CBF. For those of you who don't know, CBF is not a denomination. Rather, we are a fellowship of autonomous Baptist churches and Christians that share a passion for the Great Commission of Jesus Christ and a commitment to Baptist principles of faith and practice (esp. soul, religious, Bible and church freedoms).

I printed out 40 handouts to go along with my presentation. (You can see my resource list here). I thought I would have some left over. To my pleasant surprise, we had over 150 people in attendance! During the Q & A, someone asked if we currently had any venue to discuss issues of emergence within CBF. I told them that I knew of no such venue, so I have decided to get the conversation rolling.

If you are reading this post and are interested in broadening the Emergent Conversation within CBF life, then here are some action steps I would suggest:

I am envisioning three definite streams of intersection between CBF and Emergent Village: 1) Emergence and Theological Education (for college and seminary students, professors and administrators); 2) Emergence within Pastoral and Parachurch Ministry (for all pastors, lay leaders and parachurch professionals); and 3) Emergence for Church Planters (for church planters and national/state missions coordinators).

If this sounds like your kind of conversation, let's begin to dialogue about how this will take shape within the Fellowship. When and where would be a good place to meet? Ought this be played out on the state or national level (or both)? Are the proposed streams listed above adequate or would you suggest others? Feel free to post your comments, suggestions, concerns or queries in the comment section listed below. FYI: I'll be out of pocket for a few weeks on a mission trip to Sri Lanka to do Tsunami relief. I'll be interested when I return to the US to see where this organic conversation might have spread. Peace.

Emergapalooza 2008?

2006-06-22T22:09:00.000-05:00

Last week I had the privilege of meeting with many emerging leaders from the Emergent National Coordinating Group (ENCG). We met in sunny Minneapolis thanks to the hospitality of Solomon’s Porch. We drank, we laughed, we voiced our hopes, dreams and concerns for Emergent Village, and we strategized. One of the topics that Tony introduced was that of some kind of national gathering during Memorial Day weekend 2008. This proposed venue would not only replace the Emergent Conventions but; hopefully, supersede them. We were unified in our resolve to meet but somewhat dissonant on the shape and scope of said venue.

The conversation took form under the leadership of Lilly Lewin and Mark Scandrette. Their passion for this event was palpable and they shared their vision with us all. Lilly and Mark (and I think Tony as well, though as the facilitator, he did not weigh-in heavy handedly) envision a venue similar to Greenbelt (minus the Brits), Burning Man (minus the debauchery), or Lollapalooza (minus the big-name performers) for our 2008 gathering. The suggestion was to meet in a huge pasture in the middle of the country (Kansas City was suggested) and pitch our tents, or find a nearby hotel, and celebrate the generative friendship we call Emergent Village.

Unfortunately, having never been to an outdoor festival like this, I was not much help to the conversation. As others started to share their input, consensus diminished. Some on the ENCG shared that we typically don’t travel across the country to merely hang out, although many acknowledged the benefits of this. I know that I typically travel to learn something that I want to know more about or lead something that I already know a little about. Although I share some hippieish sensibilities, I questioned the efficacy of such a gathering. I’m an idea-o-phile … what else can I say?

The questions, for me, are both philosophical and practical. Would such an event sufficiently replace the void left by the discontinued Emergent Conventions? Would people really commit the time and financial resources to make such an event a success? What would success look like for such an amorphous gathering? One bit of reality that was brought up several times last week was that the cultural creative/artist constitutes a minority of the population. Most people prefer structure, schedules and predictability. The Emergent Conventions of the past seemed to cater to the majority. The Glorietta Gathering has tended to serve the commune-o-philes. So the caveat for many of us invited to participate in the ENCG is that when we get together we house a disproportionate number of cultural creatives.

Whom are we striving to reach with such a gathering? Will this allow our generative friendship to grow or diminish? Will this provide sufficient room for Emergent neophytes to merge into the conversation, or might they feel disconnected? Would this venue be mainly for those already ensconced under the emergent umbrella? Can such a gathering be multifaceted? How? Feel free to weigh-in on this discussion.

Week One Update

2006-06-20T07:41:00.000-05:00

Miles run...12
Hours at the gym...only 1:-(
Beers consumed...6
Initial Weight...184lbs
Current Weight...178.5lbs

Total Weight Lost...5.5

Total Weight Remaining...13.5lbs
Weeks Left...11

Another Tear is Shed, or Maybe Two

2006-06-16T08:55:00.000-05:00

Okay, so I don't actually cry about anything that goes on within the Southern Baptist Convention. I'm an outsider now. I read about things that transpire within the SBC ranks, not from some voyeuristic stance, but because of the ramifications for North American Christianity in general.

Were I to actually cry over the events that transpired at the recent SBC Annual Meeting meeting in Greensboro, the emotions would be mixed. First, I would cry tears of pain when I read about this amendment which now vies for total abstinence from the consumption of alcohol. In reading the transcript from this debate, I was not surprised about the way in which a few over-zealous messengers and committee members can so manipulate a crowd that they will utterly ignore common sense arguments. This reminds me of a scene from Gladiator, which I will reappropriate for this situation:

"I think they know what the SBC is. The SBC is the mob. Conjure magic for them and they'll be distracted. Take away their freedom and still they'll roar. The beating heart of the SBC is not the grey matter of the messengers; it's the vocal chords of the ignorant few. --adapted from GRACCHUS - FROM THE MOVIE GLADIATOR (2000)

Next, I would cry tears of joy for the hope that I see emerging from the younger generation of SBCers for voting Frank Page into the SBC presidency and not this man or this man.

Although I have significant points of disagreement with Frank Page, especially over the fact that he avers the abominable doctrine of biblical inerrancy, I appreciate his desire for a more amicable SBC. He mentioned in another article that he seeks to "clean house" with regards to current SBC leadership and that his election signifies a "turning point" in the denomination. Page attests his victory to the many SBC bloggers who have expressed their disapproval of the direction that the SBC and its daughter institutions (like the IMB and NAMB) were heading. This victory was one of only two points in the history of the SBC, since the fundamentalist takeover in 1979, where an "unapproved" candidate defeated one who tows the conservative power-brokers' party line. Page seeks to create a more "open and inclusive" Southern Baptist Convention (but don't read into this what you think it means). I am interested to see what transpires this year. Peace.

On Rationalizations

2006-06-08T21:12:00.000-05:00

So I went to my doctor this week for my tri-yearly physical, which is always a pleasure, and I got some disappointing news: I'm overweight. Now the designation "overweight" is a relative concept for sure, but it hurts to be diagnosed as overweight by a medical professional. On the doctor's scale (which doesn't account for the clothes I was wearing, the curvature of the earth, the effects of global warming, el nino, etc.), I weighed-in at 184lbs. Apparently, for my height, I am supposed to weigh 155lbs. That's 30 freakin' pounds! After a bit of compromising, the doctor and I agreed that 165lbs was a more realistic goal for me.

I told the doctor that my problem was that my metabolism had slowed down since my high school days, and that was why I had put on a few extra lbs. Without hesitation, he replied, "No it hasn't." A healthy male's metabolism does not begin to slow down until he is in his mid-30's (I'm 27) and even then it only slows by a few % points. Shit! So much for rationalizations.

So, with a baby on the way and the mounting pressures of planting one church while working at another, I have resolved to make a concerted stab at the 165 goal. Following in the spirit of a dear friend who is making great progress and one who did not make such good progress (;-)), I have shamelessly decided to share this personal information with you all in the ubiquitous cybervoid.

I'm giving myself three months from Saturday (September 10th) to hit this mark. I'll keep you posted. I could use your encouragement. Anyone want to do this with me?

Brian McLaren: Not Just Another Personality

2006-06-08T08:23:00.000-05:00

Confession: I don't typically like religious personalities. I'm not sure if it is a result of an overexposure to the stereotypical "pastor personality" that I grew up watching on TV or if it is disdain stemming from unconscious ministerial jealousy. For whatever reason, I tend to bristle when I hear someone talk about how wonderful, charismatic and brilliant some pastor, evangelist or author might be. Perhaps the reason I pooh on so many of these personalities is because many of them vehemently espouse an ideology and theology that falls a little too close to my lamentable past. When I was younger I attended a megachurch whose pastor is renowned for labeling the prophet Muhammed a "demon-possessed pedophile." That's my past. Or maybe it is because I too was mesmerized by the hypnotic tune these religious pipers played and their melody led me to follow the evangelical rats out of the city of critical reflection and engagement.

I can't help it. When I see one of these personalities on a magazine or cover of an overpriced hardback my thoughts digress. Through the clergy scandals of the 80's and the clergy scandals of today, I have lived and I have become a cynic. Moreover, my own ministerial vocation has heightened my cynicism from an existential perspective. I know my own dark thoughts and peccadillos all too well. "I am now ordained?" "I am now reverend?"

When I hear someone like Richard Land or Jerry Fallwell touting their homophobic agenda, I can't help but think--reaction formation. When I see the plastic smile of Joel Osteen, I can't help but think--he beats his wife. I don't mean to think this negative thoughts, they just come out. Quickly, however, my rational side kicks in and I say to myself, "these guys are probably great people. They probably love their wife and children, pay their taxes and are loving, gracious, humble and hospitable."

Surprisingly, this was not my experience with another religious personality who is gaining prominence in the US and abroad: Brian McLaren. My first encounter with Brian was at a training event for young CBF leaders. Brian talked about ministering in a postmodern world. We were given a copy of his book, "The Church on the Other Side." I liked him instantly. But this was four or five years ago. He had not yet been declared one of the '25 most influential evangelicals' by Time Magazine. He had not yet been invited to speak on Larry King Live. He was just a pastor who was trying to help other church leaders figure out how to navigate the turbulent waters of our culture.

Now, Brian is a bonafide religious personality. I've heard him speak several times and every time I have been thoroughly impressed with his humility, pastoral nature, perspicacity, ammenablity and un-imposing sense of humor. I have read most of his books and I thoroughly appreciate how he writes without pomposity or bombast; he writes like a friend chatting over coffee. He is one religious personality that I consider a mentor.

I wanted to share these thoughts with all of you because I know that some of you share my disdain for many religious personalities. I hope you will all read Brian's latest reflections on the church that is emerging. Peace.

White-male Privilege

2006-06-02T08:18:00.000-05:00

Last weekend I officiated my first wedding. This experience afforded me the opportunity to meet a fascinating woman, Jen Lemen. I was thoroughly intrigued by her wisdom, passion for ministry, and spiritual depth. During the reception, we chatted at length about the state of women in the emergent conversation. As she relayed bits and pieces of her struggle as a woman straining to effect change in a group dominated by men, I was saddened. If a person like Jen has become disheartened by the emergent conversation, then perhaps we are having the wrong conversation! Perhaps those of us who have found refuge under the Emergent umbrella from the incessant onslaught of the theological right or the lethargy of the theological left have become too self-absorbed.

Continue reading...

On the one hand, this is understandable. When people go through various crises they tend to withdraw into small associations of like-minded supporters; others who can existentially identify with what one has gone through. As one left embittered by several hurtful situations stemming from conservative fundamentalism, I myself have found a good bit of solace in the emergent conversation. On the other hand, this is no excuse for me or my emerging brothers to deign the lived experience of our emerging sisters. The majority of those actively participating in Emergent are white-males. Unless we are intentional about including minority voices, it will always be a majority conversation. It is incumbent upon those of us who are ensconced in the double-societal privileges of whiteness and maleness in America, to diffuse this power by supporting those with less.

I'm reminded of an historical event that bears semblance to this situation. In 1895, nearly 50 years after the women's suffrage movement got its first start at Seneca Falls, the NAWSA (National American Women's Suffrage Association) decided to exclude black women from their movement. This was largely a political move, or at least that is how it was rationalized. Some of the group's leadership (Susan B. Anthony included) did not believe that they could garner the support necessary for women's suffrage by including their African American sisters, so they excluded them. BTW: Elizabeth Cady Stanton was vehemently opposed to this decision. This resulted in the formation of the National Association of Colored Women in 1896. Here two groups of women who were fighting for the exact same thing were forced into schism because the majority was not willing to subsume the minority voices and speak as one. I'll leave it to you to draw the connections to our present situation.

This morning I read the latest post on the US Emergent blog about the Emergent Women's Roundbarn ReGathering. I was encouraged by Julie's reflections of the event. However, I was also saddened that these emerging leaders felt the need to withdraw to a barn in Indianapolis in order to have their voices heard. I understand the need to do this completely, but it saddens me nonetheless. So what can I do about this fissure that has the potential of forming a schism in Emergent?

Here's the deal: I have been a part of the emergent conversation for a few years now. I've vented, and bitched and deconstructed for much of this time. (One needs only to read some of my early blog posts here at theofragen to see how emotionally effusive I was.) I feel as if I have gotten (most of) that out of my system. I am now interested in reconstruction. I want to build bridges that are positive. I am seeking ecumenical inclusivity, racial solidarity and the cessation of sexual segregation within this burgeoning fellowship. But I am still a white-male. Whether I want to or not, I still hold the reigns of discourse and, as a result, am responsible for the kinds of conversation that ensue.

I am also a church-planter located in Atlanta, GA. And although Trinitas is still a nascent dream in my obfuscated mind, I offer it up to any of my emerging sisters who might share a similar vision for ministry. Said more directly, if any of you reading this blog would be interested in co-planting and eventually co-pastoring with me, please contact me. As long as white-males are planting and pastoring emerging churches, these will be the faces we see on book-jacket covers and on television. I would like to see this change and I now have the means to see it happen, maybe.

To other white-males who are a part of Emergent, use your privilege to support your emerging sisters. To Jen, and other emerging women, I say "Illegitemati non Carborundum."

January 23rd

2006-05-31T08:16:00.000-05:00

A new journey begins. Any tips?

Walker-Cleaveland Wedding a Success

2006-05-29T21:38:00.000-05:00

Yesterday I officiated my first wedding. It was very special for me for several reasons. First, I was honored that my dear friends Adam and Sarah asked me to participate in their most special of days. Second, I had the opportunity to co-officiate with my great friend, Mark. Third, my beautiful wife, Abby, was there to watch. A preacher at a wedding is kind of like shocks on a car. As long as everything goes along smoothly we don't ever think about them. But as soon as the ride gets bumpy, that's all one talks about. Neither Mark nor I did anything to draw attention to ourselves (in a negative way). Therefore, I proclaim the wedding a success from a logistical standpoint. The wedding ceremony and the reception went off without a hitch (although there was some last minute drama in which the limo driver took the ladies to the wrong town!). Here are some thoughts from my perspective.

Mark and I went to undergrad together and became friends on one of the first days of school. After we graduated, Mark went to Columbia Theological Seminary, where he became friends with Sarah. I went to Princeton Theological Seminary, where I became friends with Adam. It was a fun rendezvous for Mark and I. We were surprised and honored when Sarah and Adam asked us to officiate together. Hopefully, we will find a way to get the homilies we preached uploaded for your listening pleasure.

The wedding was beautiful and tailored especially for Adam and Sarah. Jen Lemen offered the couple a very special blessing and charge and Harp 46 played the music. I know that Mark and I had a great time working on our homilies for them. Hopefully, we will get to tag-team preach again sometime.

Not that Adam, in particular, needs any more traffic over at his blog, but I'm sure the happy couple would appreciate any congratulations you might have to offer them. Peace.

Thoughts?

2006-05-17T08:40:00.000-05:00

Question: Is it inherently contradictory for emerging ministers to expect to be paid to lead missional, counter-cultural communities of faith? Or, asked another way, has the professionalization of ministry birthed a laissez-faire clergy class that is robbed of its prophetic voice in service of job security?

Follow-up question: What are the implications of this for the Church in a post-Christendom world?

Green Martyrdom and the Christian Engagement of Late Capitalism

2006-05-01T09:45:00.000-05:00

This was by far the best talk.

By Rodney Clapp

Consumer capitalism vs. Production capitalism

Consumer capitalism is a functional religion—the church should engage this critically
• Earlier capitalism was centered on production→ manufacturing of physical, material goods//instilled an ethos of hard work and lasting, durable products, meant to be repaired not discarded//emphasized saving over spending (to live w/in one’s means)//many excellent goods thrived outside of the marketplace (people didn’t “shop” for churches)
• Consumer capitalism—consumption becomes a way of life, character-forming rituals//privatized faith and made it unconcerned with “public” things like economics, politics, and education. Jesus=salesman or CEO.
• Some churches have co-opted fast-food franchises and have them in their facilities.
• Many Christians have redefined themselves in light of consumer capitalism
• Consumer capitalism is particularly adept at resisting opposition by co-opting it.
• We need to transform the church into a rock that consumer capitalism cannot swallow

Martyrdom
• Postmodern Americans do not understand martyrdom
• However, martyrdom is a central facet of Christianity (consider the cross)//Jesus = the proto-martyr
• 2 Cor. 2—we are not peddlers of the gospel//Jesus, not Caesar, was at the head of the triumphal victory parade//the captives are Paul and his fellow disciples (the traditional place of the vanquished)
• For Paul, the Christian witness is wonderful and terrible, it ends in death
• The example of late consumer capitalism is one of the most egregious examples of peddling the gospel.
• Martyrdom puts both soul and body on the line and makes things public
• Consumer capitalism advances itself with a velvet glove, not an iron fist. It seductively co-opts Christians rather than killing them.
• He is talking about a Christian ethos which includes martyrdom not defined by it.
• We must be able to honor those “red martyrs” who have actually paid the ultimate price of martyrdom. Martyrs do not die to save the world. They die imitating Christ.
• Faithful Christian witness remembers the martyrs and Christ while recognizing Christ’s continued impact in the world
• Celebrities are commodities//we discard them when we are tire of them
• Heroes are not forgotten, but unlike the heroes in war, martyrs can be followed in our daily lives. They make claims on our lives; of our allegiances and priorities.
• The whole Christian community needs to become a theater of martyrdom.
• Green martyrdom (the Celtic Christians developed this notion)→ these are the Christians who went out into the wilds for ascetic monasticism
o Green is the color of money
o Green is the color of grace (life and the earth)//the earth is not a resource for human resource and consumption
o Green is the churches color for “ordinary time” between Pentecost and advent.
• This keeps us in mind that green martyrdom pervades our world

Five Characteristics of Green Martyrdom
1. Laying our bodies on the line rather than expecting others to do it for our way of life (attentive to externalities)//supporting farmers markets and co-opts

2. Working towards an economy that doesn’t separate the rich from the poor//ghetoization of the poor so the rich don’t hear their cries//not to just help the poor but to be known by the poor and to know them

3. Find communities of resistance and stay there (no more church-hopping)//long-term commitments to local communities

4. Challenging idolatry by naming greed (early Christian communities are a head-on confrontation of idolatry)

5. Live our lives with the reality that we will die. Consumer Christianity tries to deny this by convincing us that we are gods. We will die and to avoid expensive treatments designed to “stave off death”

How to Not Comodify the Gospel

2006-05-01T09:43:00.000-05:00

I stuck around for Vincent Miller's breakout session and I pressed him to clarify several things. This is what emerged.

Q: How does one avoid turning ministry into a commodity as well?
A: A community must ask itself, "Does a change in the church help people gather practices and habits into a whole, unified worldview or not?

Q: Is it either/or? Are we a part of a complete, structural, traditional mode or co-opting Christianity to meet the whims of postmodern, consumer culture?
A: It seems like commodities are only commodities in the church if the leaders fail to communicate the story behind the object of use.

My thoughts:
--Organic? Commodities? Newbigin-“community is the hermeneutic of the Gospel”—dreaming as a community, living out those dreams in community.
--Are words like organic, holistic, missional commodities? Perhaps the vital question one must be able to answer is why. We must be able to give an account of the story/philosophy/tradition that underlies the word or act.

Un-commodified Ritual or Practice:

Tradition/context/philosophy [imagine]→ n→ how this speaks into the life of the community itself [actuality]
A community must wrestle with n until it becomes ethological and efficacious
(where n = the practice/object that either could be a commodity or might not)

(Ex: Icons. Only if a community takes the time to understand the background (ex. history of iconoclasts vs. iconodules in 7th eccumencial council), tradition (ex. process of making icons by guilded societies in the East), and context (ex. how icons function within Orthodox communities) of icons and iconography, can that community begin to imagine how the use of icons would help its members to experience God with greater deapth in actual praxis.)

Faith in the Age of the Ipod—Christianity and Consumer Culture

2006-05-01T09:42:00.000-05:00

By Vincent Miller

Asking what consumerism does to faith and practice
Advanced capitalism comodifies religion
We treat our religious beliefs like we do the commodities we consume; we thereby take a passive role rather than an active role in our faith development

What is most important is not what we believe but how we relate to our beliefs
1. Habits of how we relate to culture
2. Structures that connect religion and materials
Consumer culture is not just about consuming but consuming commodities (consumption of things without considering their story).
Comodification is culture assigning value to things—viewing products as abstract, exchangeable goods
His point is about perception, we don’t have access to the information behind the commodity. We base our decisions on shallow appearance or commercial appeal.
We buy clothes from nowhere, gas from no one that has no effects on the environment.

Ipod is not only an object of desire; it is a commodity. It enables a new practice of music. Changes the way we relate to music and culture. Ipod enables the disembeding of songs from their context. Random access. We get only top hits. Narrowing of depth through increased convenience. Consumer culture gives us a shallower perception but also more freedom of access to ranges of options.

Playlists: subjective consumption is not only an option but is preferred. We share the experience with no one but ourselves. People identify with their playlists.

Religion becomes like a playlist. It is comodified. We can download information about information of other religions and make our selection. We take it out of context. We have shallow religious commitment.

We use practices out of context that are devoid of the worldview from which they came. Our commitments too readily conform to culture. Consumer culture obviates standing against culture.

Tactics (the arts of the weak, who don’t control the field)// Distinct from Strategy.
1. Piercing the commodity veil to understand where things come from. (Pick a few commodities that are important and figure out the relationship behind them). Know the origins of things.
2. Consumer choice (the moment of decision to buy something or not). Actual space is stronger than imaginary space. Consumer culture tries to get us to imagine what it would be like to possess some commodity, which is different from the actual possession of the commodity. (Ex. The bowflex: Many more people own a bowflex than use one).
3. Swimming against the tide of consumer Christianity. Take the interconnections very seriously between traditions and between institutions. Does it enable connections in praxis?

A Biblical Approach to Poverty and Affluence

2006-05-01T09:41:00.000-05:00

By Ron Sider
Advertising puts forth the great lie of our age: money/wealth/possession can make one happy or loved.

Reality//
--1.2 billion survive on a dollar a day
--2.6 billion people survive on less than $2/day

Three realities: poverty abounds in our world, the Bible has hundreds of verses talking about how God cares for the poor, and as Christians grow richer we are giving less and less.
Infant mortality is 9x higher in the rest of the world than it is in the US.

Four Key Biblical Themes:
1. Gods care for the poor-Ex. 3:7 (God acts on Gods promise to Abraham but also because of oppression). God lifts up poor and needy persons. God pulls down wealthy persons (ex. Magnificat; James 5:1). It is wrong for people to gain wealth by oppression. It is also wrong for rich people to not share, be generous. God works against such people. If we claim to be Gods people and do not share Gods concern for the poor and oppressed, we are not Gods people. This does not mean God is biased. But God sides with oppressed people because we arent naturally inclined to do so.

2. Sin is personal and social-Evangelicals used to focus on personal sins. Mainliners used to talk about corporate/social sins. Neither group do this as much any more. Both types of sin equally disturb God. Laws can be unjust. Its so subtle that we can participate in social sins without much thought.

3. Key understanding of economic justice-Old Testament serves as the example. People work hard on their own land. Every 7 years they make sure that everyone has land to work hard on. Economic justice demands that everyone has access to the productive resources. In our society, education is a capital commodity.

4. Biblical responses to wealth-the material world, in the biblical sense, is good. Its not bad in any way in and of itself. We were made in Gods image as workers and co-creators. Creating wealth is a good thing. However, this must be done justly and in a way that respects Gods creation. We also must not over-emphasize material possessions.

Some poverty is created by 1) laziness, 2) worldviews (ex. Hindu caste system), 3) natural disasters, 4) people dont have the right tools (community development), 5) unjust systems (ex. women do 63% of the work, make 10% of the worlds income, and own 1% of the worlds wealth).

Rons view is that a market economy is superior to a state run, socialist economy provided that everyone has access to the market resources.

Suggested Solutions
A. We need to change ourselves. We need people to live among the poor.
B. We need to change our churches. Smaller, less elaborate buildings are essential if churches are going to offer any kind of a plausible witness in our consumer-driven culture.
C. We need to change structures. Get to the root problems rather than treating the symptoms.

Good news: progress has been made. In 1970, 35% of all people in the world were chronically malnourished. Now, its 17%. In 1980, only 20% of children in developing countries received basic immunizations. Now, 80% are immunized. But we can do better:
Example: Christians constitute 1/3 of the worlds population and possess 2/3s of the worlds wealth. If all Christians gave 1% of its wealth in loans to the poorest 1 billion people, it would take one year to raise their standard of living by 50%.

Christianity in a Consumer Culture

2006-05-01T08:46:00.000-05:00

Last weekend I sojourned in rainy Minneapolis for a conference called Christianity in a Consumer Culture. Check out the speakers here. My overalimpressionon of the conference was positive and some of my interactions with participants were very telling. Here are some observations that unfolded: 1) I was encouraged to see so many evangelicals asking good questions about how we can obviate corporate comodification of the gospel; 2) I was impressed with the contributions of the speakers who offered an unmitigated challenge to the church to resist such comodification germane to our consumer culture; 3) I was surprised how many people with whom I spoke knew about the emergent conversation through the work of D.A. Carson; 4) I was surprised by the nearly univocal proclamation that "Emergent" is about challenging facets of liturgy and not theology; and 5) I was blown away by the number of church planters/missional community folks who seemed to position themselves in between A) consumer, evangelical culture, B) high church liturgical traditions and C) Doug Pagitt; and 6) everyone was white.

It was very interesting to me to be an alternative voice--in a group of evangelicals I was a post-evangelical, in a group of conservatives I was a moderate, in a group of suburban and rural pastors I was an inner-city pastor, in a group that likened the emergent conversation to gathering of subversive liturgists I was a voice for those of us who are questioning both the mediums and the message in our postmodern, post-Christendom world.

Over the next few posts, Ill be putting up some notes I took during the conference. Enjoy.

Daily Devotions

2006-04-27T12:55:00.000-05:00

I have been asked to contribute to an online devotional site that I frequent quite often. My meager additions will be up April 30-May 6. You can read them here each day if you would like. Peace.

On Good Introductions

2006-04-26T09:40:00.000-05:00

Some tend to skip over introductions when reading a text. I myself have often been guilty of this. However, I have come to realize how imporant it is to read philosophers along side good introductions to what they mean.

For example:
Metaphysics, for Hegel, is not about God, religion or the supernatural. Rather, it’s about the absolute, following Spinoza’s notion (absolute=the infinite substance=the universe). It is a naturalistic notion. With Schelling, Hegel contended that the absolute is independent of essence and existence and it’s organic. Contra Schelling, he argued that the absolute is the whole of substance + its modes (unity of infinite and finite). His metaphysics is a “vitalistic materialism.”
“Spirit” = the highest degree of organization and development of the organic powers within nature. God=the absolute=the whole of nature. Kant denies and Hegel affirms that we can know that nature is an organism
• the Truth is the whole for Hegel
• “Science”= fully developed truth
• Begininng of philosophy only makes sense as a place holder, a place to start and then to discard
• “Reason”=the concrete universal [Verunft (reason) is contrasted with Verstand (abstract reason)]
• Geist=the Notion=Concept (Begriff)=Absolute Idea=absolute freedom=goal to which everything tends.
• “Truth, aware of what it is is Spirit.”
• “Spirit, when it is aware of what it is, is Science." (Wissenschaft)
• “Genuineness”=the correspondence of a thing with itself, of its being or objectivity with its notion

So, when reading a philosopher, like Hegel, one cannot simply wade into the turbid waters of his thought and hope to understand. Philosophers, if they are anything, are nuanced thinkers. They play with language (and when the language is in translation this problem is exacerbated) in the attempt to describe the thing in itself (die Sache selbst). So find good introductions and read them carefully if you want to have a hope of understanding someone like Hegel. Peace.

My Master's Degree

2006-04-18T08:41:00.000-05:00

For the last few years I've felt like a kid trying to put together a 1000-piece jigsaw puzzle without all the pieces. Needless to say, the task has proven rather daunting. I'm speaking in terms of my intellectual development with specific regard to philosophy. So this is my attempt to do something about this quagmire.

Right now, I feel pretty well versed in "postmodern" philosophy and in philosophical hermeneutics. These topics lay close to my intellectual passions. However, I wish to develop a more well-rounded understanding of where these postmodern philosophers get their ideas (both which they adopt and criticize). At PTS, I got just enough philosophy to be dangerous. So this is my master's degree in philosophy.

I plan to read about these authors and their primary works and write a paper on each. Some of these books I've already read, but I feel that I will understand some of their esoteric language better if I place them within their tradition and understand their predecessors. Feel free to recommend a book or two, if you see any gaps in my outline of study. Peace.

History of Philosophy
Hegel
o The Phenomenology of Spirit
o Hegel: The Essential Writings
o The Philosophy of History
Marx
o Communist Manifesto
o The Marx-Engels Reader
Kierkegaard
o Fear And Trembling
o Concluding Unscientific Postscript
o Either/Or
Nietzsche
o The Portable Nietzsche
o The Anti-Christ
o Beyond Good and Evil
o The Gay Science
Husserl
o Basic Writings in Transcendental Phenomenology
Foucault
o The Essential Foucault
o The Archeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language
o Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings
Derrida
o Of Grammatology
o Speech and Phenomena
o A Derrida Reader
Rorty
o Objectivity, Relativism and Truth
o Contingency, Irony and Solidarity
Buber
o I and Thou
o Martin Buber: The Life of Dialogue
Levinas
o Totality and Infinity
o Otherwise than Being

Hermeneutics
Schleiermacher
o Hermeneutics: The Handwritten Manuscripts
o Cambridge Companion to Friedrich Schleiermacher
Dilthey
o Dilthey: Selected Writings
Heidegger
o Being and Time
o Poetry, Language, Thought
Gadamer
o Truth and Method

Language
Wittgenstein
o On Certainty
o Tractatus Logico Philosophicus
o Philosophical Investigations
De Saussure
o Course in General Linguistics
Â Barthes
o The Pleasure of the Text
o Mythologies
LÃ©vi-Strauss
o Myth and Meaning
o Structural Anthropology
Said
o Culture and Imperialism
o Edward Said Reader
o Power, Politics and Culture

Good Stuff

2006-04-08T11:49:00.000-05:00

Typically when I read about evangelical involvement with government these days, I shake my head in disgust. From Pat Robertson to Jerry Falwell, evangelicals are seeming to rally around ignorance with regard to legislation and politics. I was encouraged to read about this group of "evangelicals" who seem to get what the historic Baptist principle of separation of church and state is all about. Hauerwas would be so proud.

Ontology

2006-04-05T09:11:00.000-05:00

Either/or, both/and, or neither/nor?

1. "I think, therefore, I am."

2. "I am, therefore, I think."

3. "You are, therefore, I am."

4. "I interpret, therefore, I am."

5. "We are, therefore, we interpret."

6. "We think, therefore, we are."

7. "You are, therefore, I am not."

8. "We are, therefore, I am."

9. "We act, therefore, we exist."

10. "I am, you are, therefore, we are, maybe."

Devilish Hermeneutics

2006-04-03T17:37:00.000-05:00

Another Caputo quote:

So the devilishness of the deconstruction of a tradition or a text, of the insistence that we have always to do with the interpretation of signs, is not the devil itself, and is not to be conceived as a way of destroying faith or tradition, but rather of exhibiting their contingency in an effort to preserve them and keep them open ended…Deconstruction does not demolish authority and the “force of law,” but divests the authority of the law of the trappings of absoluteness, thereby making the bearers of the tradition responsible for the forms the tradition assumes and the formulae in which faith is cast. (199)

Compare this with Guder, "Our need for continuing conversion is linked directly with the reductionism of the gospel that has become pervasive in our traditions and churches" (72).

How about Frost and Hirsch: "Hold fast to the core but expreiment like wild with the expression... [A] missional community ... is careful not to abandon the truth of the gospel nor to water down its implications (80-1).

Does this make Ehrman a hero or heritic?

Emergent is for Introverts, Too!

2006-04-02T22:13:00.000-05:00

Since an earlier post, I have received some intriguing comments from friends and strangers regarding my contention that seminarians ought to engage the emergent conversation. I was especially excited to receive a comment from my former PTS colleague, Corey.

I would like to briefly clarify something that I feel is fundamental to Emergent, a point that David reiterated, and that I may have failed to express before. "Emergent," in my opinion, is mainly about relationships, community and dialogue. I like to speak/write about the "emergent conversation" because this emphasizes what I believe the relationships are about: dialogue. People are involved in this conversation at different levels. For some, I guess it is about "facial hair" and "saltier language." (I'm assuming that Corey, good-natured as he is, was being comical here. I've had facial hair for eight years now). A woman hailing from a liberal-mainline denomination once told me, "Emergent is for evangelicals who discovered they could drink beer." In a way, she is right. For some the conversation is centered upon external accoutrements and clergy ethics. This is an important part of the conversation, and one that is not only shared by evangelicals, but mainliners as well. Many people need a place where they can be themselves because they find themselves in situations that prevent them from doing so.

A second facet of this conversation regards ecclesiology; especially liturgy. Emergent leaders have been teased incessantly about candles, incense and chanting in worship. This also is an important issue for many because it provides a helpful venue for many who do not have the freedom to experiment with their church's liturgy. Such individuals need a forum by which they may engage in deconstructing some static practices while reconstructing new ones. Some don't like this part of the emergent conversation but I feel it is precious to many and should be affirmed.

A third aspect of this conversation is the theological/philosophical. People engaging in dialogue on this level are asking questions about more than the "Saddlecreek" approaches to doing church. They are rethinking core aspects of the Christian faith in light of our postmodern, post-Christendom world. These are the folks who are engaging postmodern and postliberal books on theology and philosophy. This is what gets a lot of Emergent leaders in trouble amongst evangelicals.

Let me be clear. All three foci around which emergent conversation is generated are valid and important! A friend of mine put this well in a recent email. He noted that Emergent (with a capital E) is less like the Nike swoosh (a brand label) and more like the American flag. It is a broad banner under which many different opinions and beliefs are expressed. I like the breadth of the conversation.

If you are reading this blog with any degree of frequency, guess what... you are a part of the emergent conversation. You don't have to have a blog, go to a cohort, grow a gotee, spurn penal-subsitutionary atonement theory, vote a certain way or quaff beer to be "emergent." As an introvert myself, I tend to process things internally before I am comfortable engaging others in dialogue externally. This also is important. Thank you all for being a part of the emergent conversation! Peace.

Irreducible “undecidability”

2006-03-30T14:34:00.000-05:00

I’m slowly reading John Caputo’s book of essays, More Radical Hermeneutics.
Caputo writes:

The [text], accordingly is marked by an irreducible “undecidability,” the written word being, as Plato wrote, an orphan whose father/author is no longer on hand to resolve whatever difficulties the written word may get itself into. As orphans, texts do not interpret themselves. (198)

Again, he notes:

Founding intentions are never unambiguous and cannot be kept absolutely safe. As soon as something is entrusted to the safety of language, is committed to words, an argument breaks out about the right interpretation—about the syntax, the etymology of the words, the usage, the context, the intention of the author, what the original audience would have been assuming, what the common presuppositions of everyone involved were, etc. As soon as something is said or written down, the play of traces is engaged and there is no dodging the difficulties one has bought for oneself… A deconstructive analysis forces a textual tradition back to its founding or originary acts but invariably in such a way as to bring us to see that an absolutely originary act eludes it, that it always recedes behind the trace it leaves behind, and necessitates constant interpretation and reinterpretation. Put more polemically, there never was an absolute Origin. (198)

What does that mean for “people of the Book?”

Caputo avers:

The point, however, is that the deferral and undecidability surround the Origin does not have the effect of destroying or undermining the tradition or the traditional faith, of proving that it is a fraud or sleight of hand. Rather, it produces it, by necessitating a constant rereading and reinterpretation of the founders and their founding acts, which never were quite foundational, never quite what they are made out to be by those who invoke the authority of the Origin, usually for their own ends. Deferral and undecidability do not destroy the tradition or the common faith but make us responsible for them in a way that is not otherwise possible. (198-9)

Thoughts? Implications? Rants? Peace.

Emergent Seminarians

2006-03-30T10:48:00.000-05:00

God is dead. The Church has failed. Denominations suck. If this is true, why the hell are you in seminary? You may have asked yourself this very question. What are you going to do with an MDiv anyway? Let me tell you a secret, which is kind of weird since this is a public blog. If you are in seminary you must become a part of the emergent conversation!

Thats not very postmodern, Jake, you might be thinking.

I know. But most of you who identify with postmodern sensibilities are already a part of the emergent conversation, so youll agree with me prima facie. And the rest of you are still clinging to the sticky residue of modernity, and you continue to think in absolutes, so Im giving you one. Be Emergent!

Dont worry, I speak modernity fluently, and if this post pisses you off it's a good indication that Im talking to you. Please follow my logic.

Thesis: It is essential that seminarians become a part of the emergent conversation.
Continue reading...

Point 1: The elements of postmodernity that threaten institutional Christianity will become more prominent once you begin your ministry.

Rationale:
A) Globalization will continue to eat away at the plausibility structures your seminary professors are teaching you to use in defense of your faith and this will put other worldviews into conflict with yours if you let them. This will cause you to react with fundamentalism or withdraw into isolationism.
B) Secularization will lead less and less people to come to your church, meaning that you will be criticized by your congregants/parishioners for being ineffective. This will lead you to overwork yourself to make your people happy or they will just fire you.
C) Consumerism will continue to erode the fabric of your church to the point that you will need to whore yourself to the masses to market Jesus better or you will stand your ground and they will go somewhere else.

Sub-conclusion: You need to put yourself into conversation with people who have already been dealing with the implications of postmodernity for the life of the church

Point 2: Seminaries are very, very good at training ministers for a church that is becoming extinct.

Rationale:
A) You are reading works in Biblical Studies, Church History, Theology, and Practical Theology that are written largely by other seminary professors who are no longer, or have never been, pastors. Ergo, you will need to draw out the implications with people who are a part of the rhythms of the church today.
B) Most of you are still learning from people who follow Rogerian psychology in pastoral care, andro/hetero/Euro-centric hermeneutics in biblical studies, CEO-leadership practices in practical theology, and foundationalist epistemologies in theology.
C) You are learning how to preach better sermons, teach with greater authority and acumen, and pastor with greater leadership and caring skills but this is all predicated on your ability to draw a crowd. What happens when the people stop coming?

Sub-conclusion: You cant go back in time to pastor in the 1950s, so you need to be in conversation with people who are asking questions about what it means to minister in a new kind of church today and tomorrow.

Point 3: Unless you develop a network of support for this changing climate, you will not be able to sustain yourself in ministry (i.e. you will burn out).

Rationale:
A) You cannot expect people in your church to understand what you are going through. You will need conversation partners who know what you are talking about.
B) You will need a network of people with whom you dont need to visit in person or pay exorbitant conference fees to converse with. Via blogs, websites, gatherings, cohorts and podcasts emergent folks are able to talk about issues that relate to ministry in our postmodern world.
C) Many of us learned in our theological education to be one thing as pastors, and another when we are away from our churches. This bifurcation not only makes you less able to minister to postmoderns who value authenticity, it also will lead you to hate yourself as you try to be the person your church expects you to be.

Sub-conclusion: Relationships and conversations are paramount to sustainability in ministry. Emergent provides an umbrella under which you can have such conversations and relationships.

Conclusion: With shifting social structures, theological landscapes and ministry practices seminaries are not able to keep pace with these changes. That does not mean that all seminaries are irrelevant. They serve a purpose. But unless you amalgamate your theological training with something more, you will find yourself with a degree in hand and a looming frustration that said degree is worthless. Becoming a part of the emergent conversation in seminary, or undergrad for that matter, puts you ahead of the curve. You wont need to get fired, quit, have an affair, or go insane once you enter into the wild and wooly world of church work. Hopefully;)

Peace.

Critical Contextualization (part two)

2006-03-20T11:24:00.000-05:00

This is the second post on Frost and Hirsch's chapter, "The Contextualized Church." Following missiologist Paul Hiebert’s critical contextualization model, they contend:

[A clear commitment to biblical authority] is crucial, for if the people do not clearly grasp the biblical message as originally intended, they will have a distorted view of the gospel. This is where the pastor or missionary . . . has the most to offer in an understanding of biblical truth in making it known in other cultures. While the people must be involved in the study of Scripture so that they grow in their abilities to discern truth, the leader must have the meta-cultural grids that enable him or her to move between cultures. (89; italics added displaying my incredulity)

In other words, they are advocating that “critical contextualization” means that the missionary/church-planter/evangelist first tells the people the “correct” interpretation of the Bible and then lets them talk about it from their cultural context. How is this any different from the horrid colonialist missionary practices of the 18th and 19th Centuries?

Frost and Hirsch continue, “After emphasizing the importance of the expertise of the evangelist/missionary in the second step, [Hiebert] now turns the process back to the people. This is an important feature of his model; it is congregationally based. It is not reliant on ‘experts’” (89). Bull shit! Tell me how the “critical” part of contextualization is congregationally based or not reliant on experts. What would happen if the missionary/church-planter/evangelist encouraged the community to engage the Bible from their own cultural context and only secondarily entered into the conversation, not as an expert, but as a partner in the dialogue? In my mind, that is what is so critical about contextualization. Even stronger, if we do not invert Hiebert’s model we do not have contextualization at all! Instead, what we will have is some kind of a colonial democracy akin to Who’s Line is it Anyway?—“where everything’s made up and the points don’t matter.”

Allow me to illustrate. Earlier this month my wife, Abby, flew to Baltimore to celebrate my nephew’s fourth birthday. While she was there my nephew, Skyler, insisted that Abby play make-believe with him. She obediently followed him to his room and they situated themselves on his bedroom floor before an army of micromachines, Batman action figures and robots. Skyler’s imagination engaged almost immediately. He developed an elaborate scenario that constituted reality in this made-up world and pressed Abby to join in the fun. However, when she would subject her own imagination into the mix, Skyler grew agitated. “No, Batman doesn’t do that. He goes over to the town!” After several corrections by our autocratic nephew, Abby soon realized that he was less and less concerned with her contributions to the game. In frustration he finally said, “You take this toy and go play in the corner.” Apparently he had decided that it was better to play alone than have to alter his imagination in order to accommodate Abby’s contributions.

When missionaries/church-planters/evangelists insist on holding the reigns of biblical interpretation we are behaving just like four-year-old Skyler. To try and pass off this scenario as “critical contextualization” is absurd. This model is an attempt of Frost and Hirsch to “minimize the risk and limit the possibility of syncretism or a betrayal of the gospel” (89; italics added). Notice that these fears are built upon cognitive foundtionalist assumptions. For Frost and Hirsch, it seems to me, orthodoxy trumps orthopraxy.

Contrast this with Gibbs and Bolger, who contend:

Those with an interest in ministering cross-culturally, be it in club culture or with other faiths, need to learn the art of critical contextualization. Otherwise, their witness will be compromised, and they will simply mirror the mood and mantras of contemporary culture rather than the light of the gospel. The light of the gospel will affirm elements of culture, fulfill aspirations that cannot be realized by any other means, as well as pass judgments on aspects that are narcissistic, addictive, and destructive. In the process, Christian witnesses will find themselves challenged. They will see ways in which they have skewed and narrowed their understanding as a result of their own cultural blinders. Those who witness in cross-cultural situations will find themselves changed in the process. (133)

Critical Contextualization

2006-03-17T14:41:00.000-05:00

Frost and Hirsch write:

Hold fast to [1] the core but experiment like wild with [2] the expression. The missional-incarnational church is entirely open to innovation, experimentation, and creativity...As a missional community it is careful not to abandon [3] the truth of the gospel nor to water down its [4] implications. This is called the process of critical contextualization... (81; numbers in brackets added)

Let's unpack this for a while.

First, what do Frost and Hirsch mean by "contextualization?"

"Contextualization can then be defined as the dynamic process whereby the constant message of the gospel interacts with specific, relative human situations. It involves an examination of the gospel in the light of the respondent's worldview and then adapting the message, encoding it in such a way that it can become meaningful to the respondent." (83)

This is a good definition of contextualization. Hans Frei's work is a contextualization of the gospel for his (post)liberal audience, and he differentiates between meaning, on the one hand, and meaningfulness, on the other. This distinction is important. But Frost and Hirsch do little to contribute to a contextualization of the gospel.

1. What is the "core of the gospel?" Who gets to decide what is inside and outside of the core? I'm assuming that they follow Jonathan Campbell's paradigm (80) whereby, the "core" is constituted by Christ's commands. Interesting, we are back to a rule-based system. Hmmm. Are "commands" good news?

2. What do they mean "experiment like wild with the expression?" How can Frost and Hirsch bifurcate "the core" from "the expression" if, as they contend elsewhere, "the medium is the message" (69)? Is this a bait and switch? Or is it another genuflection to consumer Christianity, whereby the same old product is packaged in a new, shiny box so that people feel that they are getting something new?

3. What is the "truth of the gospel?" Is truth the same thing as meaning for Frost and Hirsch? Can we locate any gospel truth apart from the language we use to conceptualize it or from the culture that shapes a) the original dispensation of said "truth" in culture; b) the transmittal from oral to textual delineation of said "truth"; c) the 2000-year tradition of reforming and reshaping the "truth"; and d) our appropriation of the meaning of "truth" for our own contemporary contexts?

4. How might we "waterdown its implications?" I assume that by implications Frost and Hirsch are thinking of meaningfulness. The very notion of "wateringdown" smacks of the same colonial hegemony that Frost and Hirsch pooh on earlier in this chapter (p. 81-2). In other words, it seems to me that Frost and Hirsch don't really want to advocate a "critical contextuality" at all. Rather, they want to co-opt indigenous cultures to form their "incarnational-missional communities" that perpetuate oppressive, hermeneutical imperialism.

If the kind of critical contextualization that Frost and Hirsch advocate prospers, the gospel will never be contextualized at all. It will retain the evangelical, colonial dominance that has perpetuated the fall of authentic Christianity in the first place. To rework a line from a very thought-provoking movie:

"Missionaries shouldn't be afraid of their hermeneuts, hermeneuts should be afraid of their missionaries."

Who's Feeding the Fishdog?

2006-03-17T11:47:00.000-05:00

The eminent naturalist, Charles Darwin, once wrote, "In the struggle for survival, the fittest win out at the expense of their rivals because they succeed in adapting themselves best to their environment." A few years later Herbert Spencer, one of Darwin's colleagues, in his Principles of Biology (1864) coined the phrase "survival of the fittest" as a simplification of this observation. Whether you agree with this or not is irrelevant for the discussion at hand. I would like to accept this statement as true for the time being in order to elucidate a problem I notice in some church & culture literature.

Extrapolating the pith from Darwin's theory, let us imagine that dogs-humanity's best friend-evolved millions of years ago from some primordial, fish-like creature. As the ice age folded into the Mesozoic era and the temperatures in the seas increased, the larger animals of the early Mesozoic gradually began to disappear while smaller animals of all kinds, including lizards, snakes, and perhaps the ancestor mammals to primates, evolved. If Darwin and his intellectual progeny are correct, there would have been a lengthy transition period between the primordial fish and our friendly Canis familiaris. A mommy fish and daddy fish didn't just hook up one night and out popped a school/pack of dogs. There must have been some period of transition as minor genetic adaptations enabled this evolving species to adjust to its host environment. At some point, there must have been a fishdog.
Continue reading...

My question then, as the title of this post indicates, is, "who's feeding the fishdog?" Frost and Hirsch's work is helpful though presumptuous. They seem to assume that static church structures, which have been enjoying the posh-position of Christendom for 1600+ years, will suddenly pivot and become postmodern, indigenous, incarnational communities. It's as if traditional, attractional churches are fish that are noticing their environment is changing and futurists, like Frost and Hirsch, are trying to help those fish become dogs. This ignores the proven fact that church structures change very slowly.

I know that Frost and Hirsch, and Gibbs and Bolger for that matter, have a different audience in mind than the church I currently serve. They are writing for people like me. In keeping with our metaphor, many in my congregation have just begun to notice that the environment is changing. Others have noticed that they are able to breath air, bark and scratch behind their ears in the "world" but are able to swim back into the confines of our hallowed church walls and breath through gills with relative ease. For these fishdogs, I am trying to feed them healthy doses of Bosch, Guder, Newbigin and McLaren in order to sustain them through their evolutionary transition.

Many in my church are just now beginning to take note of "contemporary worship." This is not a criticism; rather, it's an indicator of how patient church leaders need to be with their congregations through this transition. Becoming conversant with postmodern ministry approaches is still to come.

Another thing we need to bear in mind is this. Just like with Darwin and later, Spencer's notion of the survival of the fittest, only those species who are able to adapt to their changing environment pass on the genetic material necessary to enable future generations to survive. True, some species will fail to adapt and will become extinct, but not for many years. As those called to serve in this epochal transition, we must bear this in mind. We do more harm than good when we rush in with a text like Frost and Hirsch's. This is a text for dogs, not fishdogs. Moreover, the rise of postmoderninity and post-Christendom will not mean that one day we will have no more institutional, attractional churches. We still have fish, don't we? Peace.

Hmmmm...

2006-03-15T09:25:00.001-05:00

I don't know what the hell Sarah's talking about.

March 15

Being and Bearing Witness not Witnessing

2006-03-10T13:48:00.000-05:00

In my last post I fleshed out a few implications of a program-focused approach to congregational life in light of a people-focused one. That was largely descriptive, although it was not difficult to ascertain which method I prefer. I would now like to move beyond description and maybe even deconstruction, to a prescriptive mode.

Growing up in conservative evangelicalism, I heard a great deal of lip-service being paid to a programitized aberration of being/bearing witness to God's goodness, called "witnessing." In youth group we were told to "witness" to our friends. This consisted of telling other people about what God had done for us in the person of Jesus Christ and offering them an opportunity to accept Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior. I followed this program rather strictly and "shared my faith" with anyone who would listen. The premise behind my verbal displays of persuasion was laudable, albeit misdirected. My method, however, was lamentable.

In high school I read every word of Josh McDowell's two-volume apologetic treatise, Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Somehow, being and bearing witness was supplanted by witnessing which was then supplanted by argumentation which was finally supplanted by antagonism. Before I knew it, my witnessing was reduced to verbal confrontations, judgmental critiques on the life-choices of my peers and religious elitism. For me, this program of witnessing became an end in itself. It was no longer about bearing witness to what God had done in my life. I had turned into a spiritual shylock, demanding remittance for God as payment from my victims for their 'wayward lifestyles.' Is that was Jesus had in mind when he commissioned his disciples (learners) to be apostles (those sent with a message)? Were the apostles collectors of delinquent debts? Does that make God some kind of a pimp?

Keep Reading...

Darrell Guder, notes:

By defining the character of the call to witness in this way, we emphasize that in the strictest sense, the commission to be witness is granted by God independently of any causes or motivations in our human existence. We present no abilities or needs or desires that would justify the granting of this commission; there is no form of human creativity or virtue that is a necessary prerequisite for this calling. It comes from outside ourselves and is, in fact, a constant surprise for us. It is the result of God's initiation of God's mission. (60)

It seems to me that witness is something we are commissioned by God to do and to be. Being/bearing witness is intrinsically people-oriented. Witnessing, on the other hand, is a program, it's task-oriented. Maybe I misheard my youth pastor and I'm way off base here, but I understood witnessing to be convincing other people that they should be Christians. It was like a theological debate club.

Guder rightly stresses the ambiguity of the word "witness" as referring both to the person as witness and to the activity of witness, testimony (p. 56, fn. 24). This is a central facet of the New Testament. The English word "martyr," which we usually reserve for those who died for their faith, is the same word in Greek that we translate elsewhere as "witness." Were the early Christian martyr's more likely killed for their words or their lifestyle? Think about it.

Within the emerging conversation, which is still dominated by recovering evangelicals, many have rejected the conservative program called 'witnessing.' I'm worried, however, that we have also placed a kind of moratorium on bearing witness. Again, Guder writes, "The life of the community is the primary form of its witness, and it is also the equipper and supporter of each individual Christian in the practice of his or her vocation as witnessing for Christ" (68). In many of the conversations I have had with unchurched folks in my area, they share with me that their biggest grievance against Christians is that, to put it colloquially, they talk-the-talk but do not walk-the-walk. In other words, Christians are hypocrites. It seems to me that bearing witness can often supplant being witness.

As Christ-followers, we are commissioned by God to bear the image of Christ in whatever culture we find ourselves in. We need to lead with an ontology of witness. Being a Christ-follower is to pervade who we are in culture. Only after members of our community have experienced us as individuals and communities bearing witness to the Missio Dei, ought we follow the Spirit's leading to give voice to the hope that subsumes us. Once we programatize being/bearing witness under the rubric of witnessing, we only bear witness to ourselves, not God. Peace.

People and Programs

2006-03-08T08:52:00.000-05:00

If you have been a part of Church-culture for any significant length of time you have heard the lament, “20% of the people do 80% of the work.” For a mathematical dilettante such as myself, I have often thought, “Oh, 80 + 20 = 100. We’re fine.” Yet, upon closer scrutiny, it suddenly donned on me that if such a depiction is true, then only 80% of the work is actually getting accomplished and the proverbial remainder perpetually slips through our corporate fingers. If this is indeed the case, then the “faithful,” the 20%, are like mariners frantically heaving buckets of water over the sides of a sinking nave while the other bemused seafarers look-on as the waters rise. Is that an apt description of the modern church? Do you feel like a bucket-hurler or a perplexed on-looker?

Programs constitute our good intentions to minister to the needs of many people at the same time and are an important part of the Church. Nevertheless, programs often result with a few folks (maybe 20%; hint, hint, wink, wink) compensating for those who will shirk their ‘responsibility’ of fueling the program. Eventually this group will get burned-out because they are carrying an inordinate percentage of the burden (say, oh I don’t know 80%). Many well-intentioned programs are eventually scrapped in lieu of another.

Missional communities tend to place a greater degree of emphasis on people than they do on programs. They contend that programs should serve the people, rather than people serving the programs. This lends itself to a theory I have about the 20/80 scenario. I believe that we have so narrowly defined what constitutes “ministry” and have become so dependent upon programs that the Church is fated to frustration from the word, “Go!” Furthermore, I submit that we only have 20% involvement because only 20% of a church’s constituency is passionate about providing the resources needed to fuel ecclesial programs and structures. Being a missional church means that every Christ-follower is called to engage in the mission of God in her community. Can programs alone do this?

Bo Prosser, the CBF Coordinator for Congregational Life, puts it well when he says that a missional church is about “empowering people to share their passions on purpose in order to be the presence of Christ to others, whether anyone joins our church or not.” I encourage all of you who are reading this to ask yourself, “What am I passionate about?” What stokes your fire? If you could do anything with your free time, what would you do? As a case in point, consider Tabitha from Acts 9. She used her passion and talents to make clothes for those in need. Might you follow in her footsteps in some novel way?

A missional church is like an elementary school playground. Children seem to know instinctively what makes them happy. Some kids will play on the swings. Others will play kickball. Yet others will gather with their friends to talk. As adults, we must be intentional about doing things that we enjoy amidst all of life’s complexities. We must think ‘outside the box’ if we are to use our passions in ministry. God is already at work in the world among people who share your passions. What we need are incarnational manifestations of your passions to serve our communities and bless our world.

Please note, if you are already passionate about a church program then by all means please continue to do what you love. Your work is vital to our church. For those of you who feel like a frenzied sailor, trying to keep the ship afloat or a like a befuddled onlooker, trying to figure out what is going on, please hand your bucket to someone else and find something that makes you feel alive in Christ. We all have a part to play, let’s dream together about what part you are to play. Peace.

Happy Birthday Abby!

2006-03-06T12:42:00.000-05:00

View Abby's unusual birthday card here, if you dare.

Bilinguality

2006-03-03T10:03:00.000-05:00

My dear friend Eric is originally from Puerto Rico, though he has lived in the US most of his life. Given our common interest in hermeneutics, we have talked at length about postcolonial interpretations of texts, marginilization and semiotics. As a New Testament Scholar, Eric occupies two-worlds simultaneously. On one level, he is able to discuss the intricacies of the Synoptic Problem with redaction and text-criticism scholars. On another, Eric is able to give voice to the socio-linguistic aspects germane to a critique of the Euro/Andro-centric hegemony of biblical interpretation. Living 'in the margins,' as Eric confesses he does, he is able to bring a valuable criticism to his academic disciple. Moreover, his Latino heritage often brings an added perspective to the table of discourse. Eric has mastered bilinguality. He doesn't only know the words needed to construct sentences in English/Spanish or "classic" New Testament criticism/marginality criticism. Rather, he understands the nuances and philosophies that undergird both cultural worlds. Postevangelicals could learn a lot from Eric.

I just finished reading something interesting in Gibbs and Bolger's book, Emerging Churches: Creating Community in Postmodern Cultures. They write:

From a postmodern perspective, the ultimate question is, Why is it important to label oneself as evangelical? Aren't labels simply artificial divisions that make us feel safe or help us exert control? Why not mine the riches of many traditions? What is obvious is that the ecclesiastical or theological label one decides to wear is of far less concern to emerging churches than how one relates to the gospel and culture. (39)

I agree with the spirit of this statement, but I think the basic assumption is flawed. The reality of my own ecclesial existence, and this holds true for many of my peers, is that I cannot resign myself exclusively to a "postmodern perspective." We are in a paradigm shift, to use Kuhn's term. To pretend that we have arrived, that we can now operate from an a priori postmodern position, ignores the cultural reality we find ourselves in. Take me for example. In one part of my life I work for a large, institutional CBF church trying to empower them to live missionally in a super-affluent neighborhood in Atlanta. In another, I am an emerging church planter in an area of the city that is largely antagonistic towards Christianity. One community is still inured in a modern worldview. Another has adopted postmodernity, carte blance. It is imperative that I speak both languages fluently.

Again, quoting Kester Brewin and Paul Roberts respectively, Gibbs and Bolger contend:

Emerging church leaders believe that to define oneself against something is not helpful either. "When people describe themselves as post-X, they are defining themselves as (in mathematical notation) everything that X isn't." Paul Roberts also has reservations about the designation postevangelical. He declares, "I've always been a bit skeptical of the usefulness of Dave's [Tomlinson] postevangelical concept, as it tends, despite his protestations, to fall into the trap of defining yourself against something, which is an old game and seldom a fruitful one." (37)

I disagree with this assertion. First, I think that Brewin's notion of "post" is flawed. The way I understand "post" means "beyond." For Brewin's notion to be accurate, he should use "anti" rather than "post." In other words, "postmodern" does not mean "against modernity" it means "beyond the foundationalism, assumptions, and programatization germane to modernity." Postmoderns have emerged beyond the scope of modernity. We have lived it and found it wanting; hence the title, postmodern. I.e., a postgraduate degree is not against an undergraduate degree. It presupposes baccalaureate work, and moves beyond it.

In my ecclesiastical, 'marginalized' context, postevangelical is extremely helpful. It helps me to acknowledge my roots, my heritage (alla evangelical). However, I have moved beyond my evangelical background. I have found it insufficient to address my existential, postmodern situation. I am not married to Tomlinson's vocabulary, but I do find it helpful. Thought? Peace.

Look no Further

2006-03-01T16:43:00.000-05:00

The Incarnational Approach

2006-02-24T13:51:00.000-05:00

Following the m.o. of my friend, Dr. Mark, I am going to blog through certain chapters of Frost and Hirsch's book, The Shaping of Things to Come: Innovation and Mission for the 21st Century Church. This is partly a way to share condensed bits of information to people who have not yet read the book or to refresh the memories of those who have read it already. Moreover, this is an opportunity for me to share my questions with all of you to foster dialogue about these ideas. My ideas and/or questions will be presented in brackets.

Implications of the Incarnation for Mission:

1) "The Incarnation provides us with the missional means by which the gospel can become a genuine part of a people group without damaging the innate cultural frameworks that provide that people group with a sense of meaning and history" (37).

2) "[I]ncarnational mission will mean that in reaching a people group we will need to identify with them in all ways possible without compromising the truth of the gospel itself" (37).

3) "[I]ncarnational mission implies a real and abiding incarnational presence among a group of people" (39).

4) "[I]n terms of its missional stance in relation to context, incarnational mission implies a sending impulse rather than an extractional one" (39).

5) "[I]ncarnational mission means that people will get to experience Jesus on the inside of their culture (meaning systems) and their lives because of our embodying the gospel in an incarnationally appropriate way" (40).

Read Jake's thoughts...

[I'm on board with most of what Frost and Hirsch are suggesting. I, along with most emergentish folks, have become disenchanted with the attractional church that is only concerned with it's own membership numbers. I wonder though, if pitting a centrifugal approach over and against a centripetal approach seems to err in the opposite direction. They note clearly that they do believe people can experience God in a church setting (p. 41). However, this seems to be a throw-away line in the context of their incarnational push. I get the impression that they are calling for a kind of institutional red-Rover, whereby all of the "missional/incarnational" people abandon the "institutional/atractional" folks in their decaying buildings. Who, I wonder, will be left to minister to those people when all of the missional folks leave? We can talk all we want about "organic, dynamic, and noninsitutional" modes of Christianity. I'm concerned for Bill, a 78-year old man at my church who loves his Sunday School class and high-church, traditional worship. Ought I, as a minister of the gospel, tell him, "Sorry Bill, there is no 'sacred space.'" This will never be real to him--he who never fails to mention it when I don't wear a tie to worship.

Frost and Hirsch even make reference to Len Sweet and his that suggestion the church be both inward and outward looking (pp. 45-6) but every anecdote or hypothetical they offer is centrifugal in nature. Why?

Frost and Hirsch use Moltmann's work on the church that resists homogeny and makes room for the Other, which I like. However, the Moltmann references seem to run cross ways with the idea of forming intentional communities centered upon common interests (e.g., the Christian car club on p. 43). They spend the better part of twenty pages vying for an incarnational approach that absorbs the rhythms and vibes of a community in its particularity. How do they suggest we incarnate the gospel in keeping with the five principles I recount above and be utterly open to heterogeneity? They do offer an anecdote about St. Thomas' Crookes approach (p. 53) of vying for homogeneous cells that meet together occasionally. So is this how church should be?

Lastly, I don't like the language they use in describing people traditionally labeled "non-Christians" or "unchurched" as "not-yet-Christians." This smacks of evangelical arrogance to me. It reminds me of the criticism of the "anonymous Christian" motif developed by Rahner and expanded by Hick. If you are a Christ-follower, how would you like being called a "not-yet-Muslim"? I think this type of language is unhelpful in a postmodern, post-Christian world.]

Fides Quaerens Intellectum?

2006-02-21T12:00:00.000-05:00

Premodern classical theology was oriented around Anselm's famous phrase fides quaerens intellectum, "faith seeking understanding." In other words, one believes in order to understand. Prior to the "Age of Reason" Christendom itself was the a priori basis upon which intellectual questions were broached. In otherwords, the Church's authority was assumed as fact--faith in that structure was the starting point for everything intellectual. Following Descartes and his intellectual progeny, faith ceased to be the doorway through which one entered the conversation. Descartes wrote, "If you would be a real seeker after truth, it is necessary that at least once in your life you doubt, as far as possible, all things." Kierkegaard offered another way with his famous "leap of faith," which was kind of a return to the premodern approach with a more existential and less institutional bend. Unfortunately, Kierkegaard was altogether ignored by his contemporaries and it was the cognitive, the rational, and the empirically verifiable that were given precedence over the emotive and/or metaphysical. The church of modernity co-opted the scientific paradigm to make the Christian faith more respectable to the intelligentsia. As a church-planter I now find myself wondering which is the best avenue to the church? Is there a cruise-lane into the Kingdom? If so, what does it look like?

The influential mystic, Evelyn Underhill, in her book The Essentials of Mysticism, describes three capacities or faculties endowed upon humanity--the thinking faculty, the feeling faculty, and the willing or acting faculty. I'm assuming prima facie that one, a combination, or all of these are essential to faith in Christ and his rule. As a Christian seasoned now two decades, I have seen how different approaches have been used to connect individuals with God and the church. As a young evangelical fear (a prominent aspect of the feeling faculty) was the modus operandi for my entree into the Christian faith. A preacher, literally, scared the hell out of me. That feeling led me to walk an aisle, pray a prayer and take a baptismal plunge. I am not criticizing this as much as I am describing my experience. I have friends who became Christ-followers by reading Mere Christianity or A Case for Christ; quite a use of intellectual capacity. I have heard hundreds of essay-like sermons, in which the minutiae of the faith were explicated with precision. Tapping into the intellectual faculty seems to be the dominant mode for many mainline churches and seminaries I have visited. Now we have postmodern, missional approaches that suggest belonging over believing, is the key to communicating the Gospel to postmoderns.

So here are my questions: which approach is better? Or is one better? Ought we proceed with a utilitarian approach to communicating the Gospel? What implications does this have for seeker sensitive, traditional, charismatic, missional manifestations of the Church? Peace.

Frogs in a Pot

2006-02-16T07:00:00.000-05:00

Once upon a time there were a bunch of frogs that lived in a great big pot. The frogs decided that it would be best if they divided themselves into groups within the big pot and pretty much keep to themselves. As other frogs hopped by the great big pot, the frogs in the water would invite these hopping passersby to join them for a dip in the water. One day some of the frogs realized that their watery habitation was getting warmer. Some frogs refused to acknowledge this. "The water is not getting warmer," they insisted, "that is just a lie made up by an evil group of frogs to try and keep others from getting in the water with us." As the days passed, fewer and fewer frogs found the water as comfortable as they had remembered it. Many frogs left the ever-warming waters for other, cooler habitats. The frogs that remained croaked even louder trying to get more and more frogs to join them in their watery dwelling.

Things continued like this for many years until only a handful of frogs remained. Those frogs were now relying on their tadpoles to carry on the croaking, to insure that future generations of frogs would not forsake their hallowed pot and its scalding water. In desperation one group of frogs decided to get all of their tadpoles to attend a retreat for young, frog-leaders. They talked about ways to croak convincingly, so other frogs would join the pot. They learned about other boiling pots that needed frog-leaders and ways to get these frogs to call the fledgling tadpoles as their leaders. Many of the young frogs even attended a session with the chief-frog of all the pots. He tried to convince these burgeoning frog-leaders that they should stay in the pot or find another pot if the order of cooking frogs was to continue.

One hippie-frog showed up to this gathering of young, frog-leaders and he didn't look like the others. He didn't wear his froggy-polo shirt and froggy-khakis. Nor did his froggy-hairs look like the others froggy-dews. He spent the weekend trying to convince the other young frogs that the water in the pot was getting hotter and that they would all soon be dead if they didn't get out. Many refused to listen. "The water isn't going to boil," they said. "We just need to learn how to croak better and everything will be fine."

As the retreat drew to a close the head of the young, frog-leaders weekend announced that they needed three new members for a froggy-steering committee to plan future gatherings of young, frog-leaders. Despite his frustration with the weekend, the hippie-frog decided to throw his name into the pot, hoping that he could contribute a different croak to the conversation. A few days passed and the leader of the froggy-steering committee informed the hippie-frog that while his croak was appreciated, the older frogs had urged these younger frogs to stay away from such divisive croakers. They were only looking for "institutionalized" croakers. So how did the hippie-frog respond? He decided to keep croaking; hoping against hope that his colleagues would stay their froggy-asses out of the boiling water. Some frogs will listen and will learn a new language of croaking and will immerse themselves in communities with those who prefer cooler ponds to the boiling pot water. Others will slowly cook and die.

Katrina and Tony

2006-02-07T09:17:00.000-05:00

ATTN: Sorry to those of you who tried to read my blog and instead encountered a camo-clad, Turkism man. This is the second time my blog has been hacked. I think it's a problem with blogger. Anyway, I'm up and running again.

I just got back from a week-long mission trip I led to Biloxi. During our time there we repaired homes damaged by Hurricanes Rita and Katrina. I had a great time working with our team and I was reminded of why I entered full-time Christian ministry in the first place. One of the highlights of the trip for me was getting to work with Tony (pictured below). Tony is a 62-year old man whose house was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. When we met him, he was utterly without hope. By the end of the week our team was able to clear away debris from his house, tear out all of his ceiling and insulation, rewire his entire house, build two exterior walls and cover them with Tyvek, put in doors and sheetrock two rooms. You can check-out some pictures here. There is a lot of backstory to this endeavor that I don't have the energy to type out, but suffice it to say that Tony experienced a touch of grace this week from our team. The irony of the whole thing is that we were blessed through the process as well. The trip was successful and our team returned safely. Thank you to those of you who prayed for us!
(Tony holding his building permit with some members of our Katrina Team)

Biloxi Blues

2006-01-27T13:13:00.000-05:00

Tomorrow I leave for a weak to lead a mission trip to Biloxi, MS. We will be rebuilding houses that were damaged during Hurricanes Rita and Katrina. Please pray for our team of twenty as we strive to provide a touch of grace to people who have been afflicted by such horrid natural disasters. Peace.

Scarry: Pomomusings and Bode Miller

2006-01-20T08:54:00.000-05:00

Imagine my shock when I opened up the mailbox to discover the latest issue of Outside Magazine. It's scarry how much my friend, Adam, looks like an Olympic Skier. Is pomomusings secretly living a double-life?

Bloggers beware!

2006-01-12T08:47:00.000-05:00

Big Brother is watching you... or at least reading what you blog.

I look like a Homeless Guy?

2006-01-09T12:11:00.000-05:00

Last week a gentleman came to our church and informed the secretary that he needed to pray with a minister. Since my office is directly across from the reception area, I have been frequently called upon to speak with such visitors during the week. When I approached this man, who said his name was John, I could smell the cinnamony Goldschlager aroma seeping from his pores. Through bloodshot eyes and fully dilated pupils he attempted to reproduce the story he had obviously rehearsed. He told me that his whole family had just been killed in a car accident. When I shared my condolences and offered to pray for John, his tenor quickly changed. "I don't have time to pray," he said, "I just need $20 to get to Kentucky."

Continue reading...

When I informed John that our church does not give money to people who walk up off the street, his feigning grief was supplanted by anger. "Why can't you just give me $15?" he asked. I informed him that our church contributes to an organization called Buckhead Christian Ministry, an ecumenical service organization that offers many different kinds of assistance to people in need.

"Come on man, you can't lend me $10," he pined.

I responded, "No, John I can't give you any money. But I would be happy to pray for you if you would like."

"I don't want to pray. I want to talk to a minister!" he demanded.

"I am a minister," I said calmly.

"No I want to talk to a real minister."

"John, I am a real minister."

John looked me up and down and through slurred speech and mild profanity he informed me that I couldn't be a real minister because I looked just like him!

This interaction has been rolling around in my mind for a week. Does a minister's physical appearance determine his or her effectiveness? Ministers come in all shapes and sizes right? Ought I look like this or this or this or this to be effective in ministry? In all fairness to John, he was right. We both had holes in our bluejeans. We both sported t-shirts. Except for the cleanliness of our respective attires, John and I did look strangely alike.

My church is a prominent structure on one of the main thoroughfares in Atlanta. Most of our male ministers wear khakis and a polo shirt during the week and suits on Sundays. I have been called by this church to be "relevant" and "missional." So it seems that what I gain in relevance and authenticity I lose in respect. So what do you think? Should I retire the jeans and t-shirts and don the traditional ministerial garb? Should I cut my hair and remove my ear-ring so that I look the role of a pastor?

Hmmm...

2006-01-09T09:07:00.000-05:00

How do you spell REACTION FORMATION? I'm waiting for this guy (and these guys for that matter) to emerge from the closet of bigotry. Peace.

You Know You're a Religion Nerd When...

2006-01-01T17:37:00.000-05:00

You know you're a religion nerd when this is how you say "I love you."

Coordinator for Missional Community

2005-12-30T10:10:00.000-05:00

After working for Habitat for Humanity for five months I have been asked to join the staff of Wieuca Road Baptist Church. WRBC is a prominent CBF church in the Buckhead area of Atlanta. My wife and I started attending WRBC soon after we relocated to Atlanta. We were impressed, and a bit surprised, with the amazing community we experienced there. After I approached the Missions Committee about the possibility of supporting my church plant in L5P, the pastor approached me about the possibility of helping WRBC start an alternative worship experience in the Buckhead area as well. That seemed fair to me, I mean with synchronized backscratching and what not. A few months later I was floored when he informed me that the Personnel Committee wanted to interview me for a full-time staff position.

At the interview I was candid about my calling in ministry and the type of ministry I was moved to start. I shared my love of beer and blue jeans and that I had no intentions of being a traditional Baptist minister. To my surprise, the Committee extend an offer to join Wieuca's staff. That means salary, a Cadillac health and retirement plan, a con-ed budget and full-funding for trinitas.

"Missional Community" is a new concept for WRBC. Baptists have traditionally compartmentalized missions as naming a function of the church rather than describing its essential nature. I am enjoying the teaching opportunities that emerge when people ask me what missional community means. My job will be to facilitate missional living amongst our members in our community. This means I will be the point-person for all of the local ministries WRBC supports. I will be working to help our members become more active in these opportunities for service. Additionally I will be organizing and leading all of WRBC's mission trips. My first trip will be at the end of January to assist in the rebuilding process of many homes in Biloxi destroyed or damaged by hurricanes Katrina and Rita. I am in the process of planning other trips in the future.

At WRBC I will also be working to equip our community to get out of the posh serenity of our massive church building and get involved in peoples lives. We will be working this year to launch emergentish church services in L5P and Buckhead. Lastly, I will be helping to coordinate the Singles Ministry at WRBC. This should be a busy year for me, but I can't express how excited I am to be working in an area where my passions lie.

Thanks a bunch to all of you who prayed for Abby and me as we transitioned from Princeton to Atlanta. Peace.