Archive for the ‘kingdom’ Category

“Don’t go to start a church… go to serve a city.”  -Steve Sjogren

I read this line on a twitter update from Chris Bean. I’m just going to leave it at this: What are your thoughts?

Click below on comments to add your perspective.

>> This post reminds me: After accepting a new position at MVNU in August and not having time to update subversiveREFORMATION.com I was unable to post the series “On Church.” Now is the time. Be checking back for posts from Chris Heuertz of Word Made Flesh, Adam Walker-Cleaveland of Pomomusings, and more “On Church.”

In honor of our most recent Election Day in the U.S. I decided to republish this post from the archives:

I am somewhat frequently interviewed by students here at MVNU for Research Writing projects, Public Speaking presentations, or Christian Life and Ministry papers. Tonight I was interviewed by Daniel Coutz. It was one of the more thoughtful interviews that I have experienced and I appreciated the approach. The conversation went something like this:

Daniel: “Respond to this statement: The United States is a Christian Nation.”

Travis: “No earthly empire is distinctively in keeping with the way of Jesus. Those who claim the United States to be a Christian nation need to enroll in a post-reformation church history course that discusses the period of American colonization. Also helpful would be a study in theology and philosophy to explore the definitions of theism, deism, and idolatry.

Daniel: “Do you feel the American flag should be displayed in churches? Why or why not?”

Travis: “No. The church is laced with a history of symbol and icon for visual engagement in worship and when one considers what the American flag represents I would have to question what one is worshiping. I would have no problem with displaying a flag in a church if it was displayed beside every other flag of every other nation so long as the symbol is understood to represent equality and unity.

Daniel: “Respond to this statement: The loyalty of a person belongs first to his country.”

Travis: “Why would one view an earthly empire as something to which giving loyalty is necessary or a priority? My suggestion is that most would give said loyalty due to an enculturation that promotes a sense of loyalty as nessecary. I would also suggest it has something to do with the supposed ‘safety’ provided by the military branch of a certain country’s government. Fear would be that which fuels loyalty to an earthly empire.”

Daniel: “Respond to this statement. Christians living in the United States should be patriotic about the United States.”

Travis: “One’s definition of patriotism would be primary. I find it problematic for a follower of Jesus to pledge his allegiance to an earthly nation. So in the sense that the recitation of the ‘Pledge of Allegiance’ is patriotic, then patriotism may be considered contrary to ‘worshipping no other gods.’”

The Extended Melody Project benefit concert is tonight in just a half hour. Admission is a $5 donation (though you can give more) and all monetary income from admission, concessions, and shirt sales is donated to an orphanage in Cambodia through Asia’s Hope. Shirts cost $10 U.S. Dollars and are sweet as evidenced below. It is a new cut and fabric from Gildan that is very similar to American Apparel.

Do you like music? Do you like orphans? Admittedly, the second question is awkward. Awkward and real. Awkward even in three senses: 1.) Most people reading this blog probably do not like the fact that any child would be orphaned; 2) The term and idea of “orphan” is not the core identity of any child; and 3) Questioning one’s commitment or lack of commitment to acting on behalf of the fatherless may create some discomfort and/or conviction.

Two students at MVNU approached me last year with the idea to do a benefit concert as a social event in order to raise money for resources needed at an orphanage in Brasil. I said “do it.” The short version of the story is that they did do it and they are doing it again. Please visit the Extended Melody Project (EMP) page and become a Fan on Facebook. EMP will be held at Ibiza 33 in Mount Vernon, OH on Friday, October 30. (4) or (5) bands will be playing and all funds from admission and t-shirt / concession sales will be donated to an orphanage in Cambodia.

The church is being the church.

Anyone want to sponsor the event? Any creative ideas?

Informational video to be posted after editing and processing finalized. Updates to our adoption page will be posted soon as well.

[Be sure to check out the questions at the end of this post.]

I just read a blog post by Prodigal John (Jon Acuff) at Stuff Christians Like. I realized as I read his confession that I, too, am a Christian Culture Snob (though I think I already knew that I was). I would suggest that the proper language to use would be “Christian SUBculture Snob” since the Christian subculture is not a dominant presence within a broader culture to which many Christians conform, the dominant culture of the American empire. Nonetheless, I am a Christian Culture Snob according to Jon:

A Christian culture snob is a Christian that makes fun of people and things that are deemed “Christian.” I believe am cooler than you and able to edit “Love your neighbors” to actually say, “Love your neighbors unless you deem them cheesy and then instead feel free to kick them like a hacky sack woven of burlap and sarcasm.” Basically, I am prone to turn my nose up at some of the things you do.

Although I’ve reduced my degree of Christian culture snobbery in the last few years, during high school it was at an all time high, which is when I ran into you Carmen. I think you were doing that Champion song with the devil cameo and maybe the whole God’s Army thing with the dog tags at the time. And Christian radio, you were just so bright and chipper all the time. I had a field day with both of you. But looking back on it, and fearing that I’ll fall prey to Christian culture snobs when my book comes out, I realize that I was wrong and really unloving. And even though I wish I could eradicate Christian culture snobbery, I am but a meager blogger, one man who wears a retainer at night, a unibrowed writer with only a small voice. But the least I can do is to help other people know if they’ve fallen into the same trap as me. The least I can do is create the …

Christian Culture Snob Scorecard. Here are my results:

1. +0 points. I equally crucify cheesy Christian programming and The Bachelorette.
2. +3 points. Not “Jesus Junk” but I do have some other phrases to describe the knick knackery that Christian bookstores often sell at the front.
3. +2 points. Chris Tomlin, no. I met him and he was cool. Casting Crowns, absolutely!
4. +1 point. I don’t get the goosebumps from “I Can Only Imagine” but Shane and Shane might get me a little.
5. +5 points. But… you can usually tell.
6. +10 points. This is my worst offense!
7. +3 points. Ha! Ha!
8. +2 points. Only mildly embellished jeans.
9. +5 points. That’s me.
10. +0 points. Nope. I’m fully aware.
11. +3 points. Indeed. It’s true.
12. +3 points. Not Man on Fire but… yes… many other films.
13. +1 points. Maybe even 18-19%.
14. +1 points. Ditto “The Fray.”
15. -2 points. I’m proud that I went to a Michael W. Smith concert because I brag about the fact that I fell asleep.
16. +2 points. You have an abnormal amount of disdain for the movies “Facing the Giants” or “Fireproof.”
17. +8 points. Once again… I fell asleep after 5 minutes of “FtG” and refuse to watch “Fireproof.”
18. +2 points.
19. -2 points. I regularly criticize the cheesy nature of Christian culture but do all that I can to change it.
20. +3 points. He is intense. Saw Stephen Baldwin at Ichthus and the crowd started chanting, “Bio Dome.”
21. +10 points. I just say that there is no such thing as Christian music.
22. +2 points. Kirk is right up there with pleated khakis and the Republican haircut.
23. +3 points. I’m not a middle-aged female.
24. +0 points. I checked out the site because I was hoping it would be satire.
25. +16 points. Indeed.
26. +4 points. Complete lack of wisdom.
27. +0 points. Not really.
28. +3 points. Oh, Thomas.
29. + 4 points. Forget the strong, godly man with the mysterious past. I just make fun of Christian romance novels in general.

I scored 93. Off the charts. Once again, I have to agree completely with Jon:

How did you score? To be honest, I fluctuate a little but on most days, I am on off the charts. But what this site is teaching me is that mocking doesn’t really do awesome things for Christianity. I’ve definitely blown that sometimes with what I write and am probably the guiltiest of all of us, but I realized something the other day. I’ve never once had a non-Christian say to me, “You know, this faith you’re making fun, this Christian culture you’re mocking sounds really intriguing. I think I do want to start an everlasting personal relationship with Jesus. Thank you for being so willing to make fun of Carmen for me.”

I must ask a question. OK… a couple of questions. Is it good that there is a Christian subculture? Is the current, popular Christian subculture even really “Christian?” What does a real, healthy, and good Christian culture look like?

 Loading ...

You may select up to (2) options. If you want to select “other” then click comments and add another option there.

Adapted from a post on July 3, 2008:

I’ll be honest. I’m not a fan of Independence Day. I’m trying to sort through whether that opinion is fueled by the despicable taste in in my mouth when I see red, white, and blue waving as a symbol of national allegiance and empire worship or simply by my struggle to intellectually and philosophically value independence. Freedom is good and necessary but cannot exist through the supposed provision of an earthly empire. Freedom is in the person of Jesus Christ and is quite different from that with which it is quite often confused, “rights.”

My reading on July 3rd proved to be rather timely for the upcoming day celebrated by most citizens of the United States. From Free of Charge by Miroslav Volf:

“Here is roughly how sin works in relation to God the giver. All things are from God and through God, and yet we want to be independent of God, standing on our own two feet, claiming God’s gifts as our own achievement. The young Karl Marx, barely twenty-six years old, put this sentiment as boldly as possible. In a text that remained unpublished during his lifetime, ‘Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts,’ he gave an expression to the heart of his rebellion against God:

‘A being only counts itself as independent when it stands on its own feet and it stands on its own feet as long as it owes its existence to itself. A man who lives by grace of another considers himself a dependent being. But I live completely by grace of another when I owe him not only the maintenance of my life but when he has also created my life, when he is the source of my life. And my life has necessarily such a ground outside itself if it is not my own creation.’

Marx held firmly to human independence. It almost seemed to him a value that lies at the bottom of all values. Because the reality of God as creator is incompatible with human independence, he denied the existence of God.

Most of us, especially the believers among us, won’t deny God’s existence in order to secure our independence. Instead, we think that we can have it both ways. We believe that we can stand on our own two feet, independent of God, and still affirm that God is the creator of everything. But that doesn’t make sense. We can be both dependent on God and free; dependence on God is the source of our being, and therefore, our freedom. But we can’t be created by God and independent; God sustains creatures in being and in freedom. When we assert our independence, when we ascribe to ourselves what comes from God, we wrong God – at least as much as I would wrong an author whose ideas I would peddle as my own. That’s our main sin against God the giver. If, like Raleigh Hays, we see ourselves as more or less honest, hardworking citizens, we may believe that we deserve what we have, and even a bit more because an evil world is cheating us of our proper reward. We might not feel particularly grateful for what we have because we think that, rather than receiving it, we earned it. And we want to dispose of our hard-earned goods the way we please; they become not so much gifts given to us to enjoy and pass on, but rather our exclusive possessions.

Assertion of independence, pride of achievement, sense of entitlement, and absolute right to dispose with our goods – these are the ways in which we live in contradiction to who we actually are in relation to God. And in these ways, we, decent citizens, live as inveterate sinners. To live in sync with who we truly are means to recognize that we are dependent on God for our very breath and are graced with many good things; it means to be grateful to the giver and attentive to the purpose for which the gifts are given.” //

// Miroslav Volf. Free of Charge: Giving and Forgiving in a Culture Stripped of Grace. pp. 35-6.

Reflecting on my previous post that notes the silent historical framework of the emerging/emergent movement brought to mind some foundational questions on church.

What is the church? What is not the church? What should the church be?
Who is the church? Who is not the church? Who should be the church?
Where is the church? Where is not the church? Where should the church be?

This post is the beginning of a series On Church. I will be publishing a series of posts from contributing authors to provide their reflections on church with a focus on the above questions. Throughout the series I will be posting my own thoughts as well (though my thoughts most likely are not my own and reflect those who have actively been involved in my formative process). If you are interested in contributing, please send an e-mail to tkeller@mvnu.edu and include your contact information.

The Silent Historical Framework of the Emerging Church

Recovery of Genuine Wesleyan Theology in Postmodern Context

Travis Keller

02.29.08

A Condensed Book Review from a Wesleyan Theological Perspective on

“Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures”

by Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K Bolger

“Common needs often create strange alliances.” Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger begin the preface of their book entitled “Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures” by addressing their seemingly implausible ability to write a book together. Strange alliances, indeed. Many hear the words “Christian community” and “postmodern cultures” used in conjunction with each other and immediately assume that the two are being juxtaposed one against the other. The same may be true for the terms “Wesleyan theology” and “emerging church.” While the connection between the two may never be verbally stated, Wesleyan theology may very well be the silent historical framework of the emerging church.

It is noted in the book that the process of dismantling the modern (referring to a historical era and philosophy) practices of Christianity “is a fragile movement that can be marginalized by denominational leaders and killed with criticism by theological power brokers.” Churches that are “emerging” in their practice are faced with great degrees of resistance. To associate with any certain theological tradition would be suicidal to a hopeful movement. The labeling system within the Emerging Church has caused immense confusion so a further label would arouse criticism growing from its current level of existence into a destructive force from both opponents to the noted tradition and adherents to that tradition. Opponents would continue to oppose that which they already oppose and adherents would defend their tradition in an attempt to preserve it from a supposed threat and distortion. The reality of the shift in church practice, however, is ultimately going to reflect certain roots in the history of the church. The ideas for ecclesiological method offered by Emerging Churches closely align with the thought of John Wesley.

The emerging church is difficult to define. Moderns may desire a clear, definitive statement but as noted by Doug Pagitt, the church is “not necessarily the center of God’s intentions. God is working in the world and the church has the option to join God or not.” By avoiding a precise definition of emerging churches, Gibbs, Bolger, and company allow the church to function as a moving organism whose missional direction is dependent on its own choice. What may be criticized then as a low view of the church is actually the highest view imaginable. The church is dependent on grace when it chooses to follow its own way rather than the way of Jesus. Wesley, an advocate of the free will of humanity trusts in means of grace gifted by God when the church moves in a manner that reveals the imperfect people that it is.

Wesley contends that the church is not to be separatist or divisive. The emerging church is distinctively Wesleyan then in that it does not merely get caught up in argument or exchanging critique with its opponents but rather focuses on the person of Jesus and the love for others that he offers. Gibbs and Bolger note three core church practices from which other practices are created. They are “(1) identifying with the life of Jesus, (2) transforming secular space, and (3) living as community.”

The message of Jesus was not a message about going to heaven. His was a message and demonstration of enacting the Kingdom of God on earth. To live in a manner that reflects the life of Jesus is to truly embrace what Wesley termed “entire sanctification.” The Church is the people who are called out and set apart to enact the Kingdom of God on earth. To do so requires a confrontation with the risk and cost of following Jesus and thereby necessitates a grace that precedes (preveniant) the Church, enabling it to embrace the fullness of the mission of God by entering into that which may be considered “secular” and living in a “sacred” manner. Such living entails relinquishing one’s “unlimited sovereignty over his or her individual person” in order to “create missional communities” that may only exist within the context of love. Wesley states, “By this let all men know whose disciples ye are, because you ‘love one another.’”

Gibbs and Bolger proceed with more practical examples of Emerging Churches that very distinctively reflect Wesleyan theology. Wesley continually references the need for the Church to care for the poor and marginalized. Contrary to the quite exclusive appearance of many church gatherings, Emerging Churches are to be accepting and inclusive. Not only does inclusivity include people from other traditions, cultures, and even faiths but it also extends to the poor who are otherwise considered strangers. Central to the gospel message is that those who “don’t have” are invited to share in the “having.” The stranger is to be invited into the community. He/She is to receive that which is given generously. Hospitality remains a key component of helping others to honestly accept themselves as true members of a community for a generous gift is much more useful, according to Wesley, when it is personally delivered. Giving accompanied by shared relationship is invaluable to the message of Jesus. It removes the thought of needing to receive in return.

Emerging Churches concludes with sections devoted to the concept of the body of Christ producing and creating. There is reference to the same passage in Ephesians that Wesley uses in his address “Of the Church.” In order for a community to function in full health each member must use his/her talents and giftings as he/she has been granted. “Full participation is an alternative to [modern] consumer church” which is founded ultimately on fulfilling a selfish desire. Emerging churches seem to pursue the concept of the priesthood of all believers where all members of the community are contributing. No one is being served any more than he/she is serving.

“Emerging churches are communities that follow Jesus into the kingdom and the far reaches of culture. [They] destroy the Christendom idea that church is a place, a meeting, or a time. Church is a way of life, a rhythm, a community, a movement. Emerging churches dismantle all ideas of church that interfere with the work of the kingdom.” With Gibbs’ and Bolger’s representation of Emerging Churches, Wesley cannot argue. The way of living taught by Wesley and the way of the Emerging Church is the way of Jesus.

Please select up to two (2) answers that best represent(s) your preferred form of being church. You may elect to choose only one option or you may choose two or none. Please be sure to add a comment to either explain your reasoning or state why you believe the survey is grossly inaccurate, mis-worded, and/or impossible to answer well.

 Loading ...