Posts Tagged ‘postmodern’

I was speaking with a group of junior high and high school students this weekend about issues of marginalization and oppression. I specifically turned the conversation from acting on global issues to recognizing injustice within our local proximity. For them, it meant moving from a focus on hunger in the world to the often unjust or unloving treatment of peers in the classroom, at the lunch table, on the athletic field, and within social circles based on economic status. I asked the questions, “If Jesus showed up right here, right now, in this place, who are the people to whom he would be giving his attention? How would he be spending his time? How would he be listening to the voices of those who are often forgotten or ignored?”

An ever-so energetic, enthusiastic, and hormonal adolescent boy instantly shot his words from his reclining chair, “You mean like… what would Jesus do? Like the bracelets.” As I reverted back through the 1990s and the “WWJD?” movement, the phrase made my insides cringe and quiver while my mouth slowly opened and reluctantly uttered, “Yeah?”

I had to concede to my now junior high nemesis.

Essentially, I was hoping that these young minds would actually consider who the person of Jesus was and how he may enact love in our current context minus the popular Christian subculture catchphrase that makes the reality of the question so easy to dismiss.

“What Would Jesus Deconstruct? by John D. Caputo, Thomas J. Watson Professor of Religion and Humanities and professor of philosophy at Syracuse University, begins, “In 1896, Charles Sheldon, a pastor in Topeka, Kansas, wrote a book titled In His Steps. The subtitle of Sheldon’s book, What Would Jesus Do? fueled the later ‘WWJD’ industry – the bumper stickers, T-shirts, and bracelets that boldly pose a question to which the Religious Right is sure to know the answer. My hypothesis is if our friends on the Right really mean to ask that question instead of using it as a stick to beat their enemies, they are in for a shock.”

I would agree with Caputo and therefore may create my own line of products to sell in a Parable or Lifeway Christian Bookstore near you (because that’s what Jesus would do). The products would read, “WWJD? You don’t want to know.” No. Really. You probably, really don’t want to know.

I have read a number of articles about using a reader in order to keep up with blog content when wanting to read numerous blogs. Tyler Braun wrote about using Google Reader. I think if I were to use a reader it would be one from Google since they, in conjunction with Apple, do in fact run the universe (by which I mean, if Google and Apple didn’t exist there would be a cosmic implosion causing all things to move to a higher state of order which is simply unacceptable and perfectly acceptable in the postmodern era).^ I have elected, however, to avoid using a reader. Part of the blogging and blog reading experience extends well beyond the content hammered out on a keyboard. A reader delivers the content of individual posts but does not capture the fullness of a blog. Many bloggers spend hours designing layouts, color schemes, and headers (or is that just me) in order to 1) provide the reader with a pleasant and artistically engaged online experience; and 2) offer content and links that enhance the message of the written material. Unless Google’s Reader has a content feature that I have yet to explore I would suggest that one simply use the bookmarking and RSS features found in internet browsers in order to directly visit the sites about which you care. Appreciate the art. Appreciate the feel. Don’t just read it. Experience it.

^ For those needing explanation due to the sarcastic language concerning existentialism, postmodernism, and theology(ism), I may write another post with a more modernly-toned explanation.

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.

I welcome and appreciate comments that question the intent or perspective of my posts. One particular comment, which may seem adversarial but I would suggest is written for constructive or at least clarifying purposes (tone and intent are largely lost in the blogosphere), reads as follows:

"im a little confused on your opinion of journey. i have been there a few times but not much scripture was used so i haven�t been back. may come again sometime though.

speaking of scripture�. i appreciate your writing but would like to see more scripture references.

i�m also curious to why you chose the name �subversive reformation�. a lot of post-modern movements (like rob bell, donald miller, shane claiborne kind of thing) make me wonder if we are too cynical and proud of our big words and creative artwork that we miss the point: LOVE."

Please note that I am not degrading this comment but rather continuing with the invitation for discussion. There are many directions in which to go but I want to begin by addressing only one small element of the comment. I may return to the ideas of postmodernism, movements, naming, and cynicism but first want to conisder "scripture references."

We have been conditioned to expect Scripture to be used in a certain way. Don’t get me wrong, I highly value the recitation of Scripture during church gatherings. I sometimes need to go to a Catholic or Episcopal gathering just to hear the public reading of God’s written communication with humanity. It is good for the soul of my recovering popular-evangelical self.� However, to quote Scripture doesn’t mean that one has to "quote" (pun intended) Scripture. Modernism has conditioned us to want references, bullet points, quotations, citations, enumerations and many other "ations." Our western, post-enlightenment minds that place an overly-high value on reason and logical processing have difficulty recognizing that Scripture is interlaced within our stories.

Here, I will draw a parallel using a specific reference from Scripture . The book of Esther found in the Hebrew Scriptures (TNK ) never uses the actual word "God" in any of its forms (YHWH, Elohim, etc.) Esther is the only book of the Bible that does not use the word "God." Does that mean that God is not present throughout the story? Should the book of Esther not have been included in the Bible? Should it be discluded from that which is considered in the Judeo-Christian tradtion to be "holy writing" simply because the word "God" isn’t quoted? Equally, should any writing that does not "quote" scripture be tossed out as though it is irrelevant and removed from the narrative of God with his people?

Since my last posting on movies I have seen a number of additional motion pictures that have altered a previously determined list of best movies ever.

The Top 10 Films Ever
NOTE : This list is not biased and is completely accurate.

In NO particular order:

1. The Bucket List
2. Reign Over Me
3. Rain Man
4. Braveheart
5. Shawshank Redemption
6. The Dark Knight
7. A Beautiful Mind
8. The Matrix
9. Batman Begins
10. Good Will Hunting
11. Finding Forrester
12. Crash
13. Pay It Forward

It appears as if my postmodern tendencies permitted me to supersede the previously prescribed list of ten movies. If you were to eliminate three movies, which would you choose and why? If you were join me in my postmodern exploits, what films would you add and why?

I am…

POSTconservative.
POSTatheist.
POSTchristendom.
POSTmodern.
POSTcolonial.
POSTlapsarian.
POSTenlightenment.

And I follow Jesus.