Monthly Archives: June 2007

The Forgotten Ways (Alan Hirsch)

Posted on by


I found this to be a very good book, although it had one or two very irritating flaws, not the least of which was an astonishingly inane jacket-quote from someone called Leonard Sweet, which would have prevented me from buying the book if I had seen it beforehand.

But that’s a cavil. This is an excellent book about mission; one that I will almost certainly be sharing with the wider leadership team here. It’s had quite an impact on me, not least in providing ‘the fourth thing’… I’ve often thought that (following Eugene Peterson’s analysis) there were three things in my ministry that I felt called to concentrate on: celebrating communion; teaching and preaching; and spiritual direction. However, I’ve also felt that there was a ‘fourth thing’ that was in me and that didn’t quite fit with this – and I’ve variously called it management, or leadership, or even (before I came to Mersea and decided against doing a PhD) ‘the Civil Service element’ in my character. What this book has done for me – and for which I am profoundly grateful – is given me a different description of this element, and one, moreover, which gives me great peace. It is the apostolic element. Hirsch quotes Steve Addison saying:

“The apostolic role within established churches and denominations requires the reinterpreting of the denomination’s foundational values in the light of the demands of its mission today. The ultimate goal of these apostolic leaders is to call the denomination away from maintenance, back to mission. The apostolic denominational leader needs to be a visionary, who can outlast significant opposition from within the denominational structures and can build alliances with those who desire change. Furthermore, the strategy of the apostolic leader could involve casting vision and winning approval for a shift from maintenance to mission. In addition, the leader has to encourage signs of life within the existing structures and raise up a new generation of leaders and churches from the old. The apostolic denominational leader needs to ensure the new generation is not “frozen out” by those who resist change. Finally, such a leader must restructure the denomination’s institutions so that they serve mission purposes.”

In a week of great and diverse stresses it has been very healing and heartening to read that.

There were two other elements that really resonated with me: the first, that the apostolic call isn’t about pastoring as commonly understood: ‘in actual practice, a predominantly pastoral conception of the church and ministry now actually constitutes a major hindrance to the church reconceiving itself as a missional agency’. The second, that the apostle is first and foremost a working theologian, one who safeguards the ‘DNA’ of the Christian faith. That is precisely what I have seen as most essential in my ministry so far, and the source of all the positive things that have followed (such as there have been).

A final long quotation (from Karl Barth, which the book ends with):

It is certain that we all have reason to ask ourselves each of these questions and in every case quickly and clearly to give the answer:
No, the church’s existence does not always have to possess the same form in the future that it possessed in the past as though this were the only possible pattern;
No, the continuance and victory of the cause of God, which the Christian Church is to serve with her witness, is not unconditionally linked with the forms of existence which it has had until now;
No, the hour may strike, and perhaps already has struck, when God, to our discomfiture, but to his glory and for the salvation of mankind, will put an end to this mode of existence because it lacks integrity;
Yes, it could be our duty to free ourselves inwardly from our dependency on that mode of existence even while it still lasts. Indeed, on the assumption that it may one day entirely disappear, we definitely should look about us for new ventures in new directions.
Yes, as the Church of God we may depend on it that if only we are attentive, God will show us such new ways as we can hardly anticipate now. And as the people who are bound to God, we may even now claim unconquerable security for ourselves through him. For his name is above all names….

Amen. Praise the Lord!

The Tilling Statement of Inerrancy

Posted on by

I thought this rather good:

I believe that all scripture[1] is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.[2]
I believe that the prophets were moved by the Holy Spirit and Spoke from God.
I believe that God speaks in many and various ways,[3] and most definitively he speaks about God’s Son.[4]
I believe that as we read scripture, we are invited to approach Christ,[5] and hear the final and definitive Word God speak to us in his Son.[6]
I believe that as we read and study scripture seeking Christ, we are addressed by God, that through scripture God speaks to us.
I believe the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing until it divides soul from spirit, joints from marrow; it is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.[7]
I believe that humans do not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.[8]
I believe that the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined in a furnace of clay, purified seven times.[9]
I believe scripture is trustworthy and precious, deserving of my study, love, time and energy.

Untouchable

Posted on by

(This is the synchroblog for this month.) Click ‘full post’ for text.

Every society has purity taboos – these days they often masquerade under the description of ‘hygiene’ – but even if a situation is hygienically sound, we may still have all sorts of qualms. Any society will have these taboos, and they will be used to regulate that society, to determine who is ‘in’ and who is ‘out’ – and those who are out will be precisely not touched.

This kills. Consider – a baby that is well fed but otherwise not touched will die. A baby raised in continuum fashion will thrive, even if perpetually hungry.

And the lethality of the taboo is what engages Jesus in his life and teaching. For Jesus is the one who overcomes the taboo; who deliberately transgresses the boundaries; he is the one who gives life.

This has direct political consequences. It is a large part of why Jesus is executed. A socially constructed polity must have the scapegoat – and the purity law dictates who is to be the one marked off.

It is part of the Christian ethic, part of the task for each generation of disciples, to overcome the taboos generated by their society and touch those on the outside.

It is also a part of the Christian ethic to overcome the taboos that have been established within, and to be touched on the inside.

In each case, this is where the grace of Christ operates; this is where redemption occurs; and this is where the church can be really the church.

To be a Christian is to touch and be touched. To be untouchable is to be in hell.

“The Peace of the Lord be always with you!”

To the lost Christ shows his face;

To the unloved he gives his embrace;

To those who cry in pain or disgrace,

Christ makes, with his friends , a touching place.

Other people talking about this today:
Mike Bursell muses about Christianity at the Movies
David Fisher on Touching the Pharisees – My Untouchable People Group
Jeremiah at Models of church leadership and decision-making as
they apply to outreach
John Smulo talks about Christian Untouchables
Sally Coleman shares on The Untouchables
Steve Hayes on Dalits and Hindutva
Sonja Andrews visits the subject here
Phil Wyman throws out the Loose Lips – A “SinkroBlog”

Aeon flux

Posted on by


It was a strange experience watching this. I’d wanted to watch it for a long time, because it’s the sort of film that is right up my street, but all the reviews were so bad I had put it off until it came on Sky. I can see why the reviews were so bad but I suspect there was a really good film here trying to get out. Apparently the studio trimmed about half an hour off the director’s running time – if that was all the exposition and character development it would explain the massive imbalance between style and substance in the final product. It would also explain why someone as talented as Theron would agree to be in the film. If there is ever a director’s cut released, I’d probably buy it. But unless you’re a trash-film-junkie like me I wouldn’t recommend watching this present version.

TBTM20070615

Posted on by

Right, so. Big decision taken and acted on. I’ve sent off a book proposal (based on ‘Let us be human’) to Darton, Longman and Todd.

As I’ve previously had several rejections from publishers, my confidence isn’t especially high – though this material is much more developed than it has ever been before. I’ll let you know what they say.

Your own personal Jesus

Posted on by

I am pondering the next sequence of Learning Church talks, which will start up in October, and the theme for the first four or five will be evangelicalism – full title: “Your own Personal Jesus: an outsider’s perspective on evangelicalism”.

This is my initial sketch of what I’m wanting to cover:

Before the Great Awakening
– the historical context of evangelicalism (English enlightenment – John Locke – rationality); the anatomy of evangelicalism; what are the core elements? distinction between evangelicalism and Reformed theology

The great evangelicals
Jonathan Edwards; the Wesleys; John Stott (others? Billy Graham?)

The problem with America
19th century theological drift; arminianism; Charles Finney; 20th century consumer culture; Billy Graham and the altar call? Pentecostalism?

Aspects of contemporary crisis
Wycliffe Hall? Women bishops? Gay bishops? US imperialism? Theological critique continued?

The post-evangelical future
Postmodernism as removing the conditions that led to the rise of evangelicalism, and therefore where evangelicalism is now; ‘deep church’; emerging church; a survey of divisions and the lie of the land.

~~~
To oversimplify drastically I’m going to argue for the following:
– evangelicalism was born out of a reaction to a sterile and non-Christian culture, most specifically English culture after the Glorious Revolution (1688), and it has two great virtues that stand out against that background – i) an insistence on the centrality of Jesus for Christian faith, and ii) an embrace of a more affective understanding of the faith. This is the sense in which ‘personal Jesus’ is very positive, ie a transforming relationship, ‘my Lord and my God’;
– Jonathan Edwards and (especially) the Wesleys as still having vast amounts to teach us about what it is to be a Christian today;
– the corruption of evangelicalism by influences stemming from the United States in the nineteenth century, looking at Finney in particular, leading to Jesus becoming a commodity incorporated into a wider economic system, the consumer model of church – “personal Jesus” as analogous to “personal trainer”, “personal assistant”, “personal shopper”, ie an extension of individual will;
– links between ‘classic’ evangelicalism and the early church – the emerging consensus.

You could say that the Johnny Cash version of the song reflects the first understanding; the Depeche Mode original explores the latter….

This is me thinking out loud. I’m posting it because – as an outsider (smile) – I’m sure there are all sorts of aspects that people out there will know more about than I do, so if anyone sees any big gaps, please do say ‘hey, you haven’t mentioned ______’ – that’s really crucial to understanding evangelicalism!

(NB I will rely on a distinction between evangelicalism and Reformed theology, which I will argue for in the first session)

Resource constraints will limit global warming

Posted on by

At last some thorough analysis on how Peak Oil links in with global warming – go here for the entry-site (HT Energy Bulletin).

Key argument:
– the IPCC do not take resource constraints into account in their climate models;
– all 40 IPCC scenarios assume that more hydrocarbons will be used than a resource analysis suggest is physically possible;
– a ‘producer-limited’ analysis suggests that CO2 will peak at 460ppm in 2070;
– the temperature rise is approximately 0.8C by 2100;
– a political ‘Super-Kyoto’ agreement would reduce that figure by 0.04C;
– it’s more important to reduce ultimate (total) hydro-carbon use than to slow it down.

Absolutely fascinating. Lots of implications to ponder. Youtube video of his talk is below (67 minutes)