Decisions, decisions

I have been rolling the theological issue of evangelism in my thinking. What this has come down to is the issue of a "personal decision" and hence a "personal" Lord. I think that this theological issue needs to be re-thought (which some are doing). We are in a post-Christiandom, post-Constantinian age (for those who do not know what those mean, simply think postmodern. if that still is drawing blanks, read some political philosophy or something current concerning religion) which means that we Christians can no longer think that we can pack out stadiums and send an evangelist in front of them to preach the Good News in order to get them "saved." It does not work like that anymore, that day is dead.

What that evangelism has generally done to the Christians is pretty much nothing. It "saved" them and then told them to go find a church and read the Bible. So a bunch of newly "saved" people who had little idea of the "liturgy" of the church and were interpreting the Bible on their individually own, entered into churches with no clue. And if these churches were somewhat normal, it seems to take some time for the congregation to warm up to those who are more introverted, which means even more isolation of the individual who thinks that he or she goes to church in order to receive that "nugget" of truth or that spiritual food, which they do but it is not in the form of an objective proposition that a person can take home like some commodified good, (and do whatever they want with "it"); it comes through the re-membering of the Body of Christ through the Liturgical re-telling of "calling out"; confession of sin; communal prayer; hearing the Word; participating in the Eucharist/Lord's Supper/Communion; and the "sending out" which re-narrates us into the narrative of the Lord Jesus Christ.

What we need to do as churches is come together and becom a prime community in our lives as Christians and not just simply something we do on Sunday morning (though the Sunday worship is absolutely vital being the eighth day of the week; The Lord's DAy. It just does not stop there). We need to find creative ways to be able to learn how to depend on each other as opposed to being completely self-sufficient. We need to learn how to help each other out of the hard times so when the real hard times come, we will know how to "be." Within this context we can start inviting our friends to participate with us (that is to say that we need to build the friendship first and when they notice that we are on a different mission that liberal, consumer-capitalist mission then we can invite them into the mission of Christ). Therefore, we are after baptisms that bring people into the story that will convert and transform them into new creatures as opposed to a "personal" decision to have a "personal" lord.

Concerning this "personal" lord idea, Christ is titled as the King of kings and the Lord of lords. He is the King of the cosmos and his mission is redeeming the creation back unto himself. This is far greater and far larger than simple some God "vacuum" with each one of us. To come together in his Body is to come together and become a part of each other lives and to confess our sins one to another and bear each other's burdens. This is the farthest thing from some simple religious "opinion." This means that the Christians in my community will have a say in my life and I in theirs, likewise Christians everywhere have the right to dialogue to me about my life and thoughts, my interpretations and actions. This is not personal as made known by our society.

Our surrounding society wants us to think that the Way is simply personal, beliefs and convictions that have no more substance than ignorant opinions. They want the Way to be opinion and it will be ok for us to have those "opinions" as long as these opinions do not leave our own personal lives. You see, as an American, my neighbor has really no right to become involved in my life if I choose to keep him out. I have even heard those stories of people sueing those who have saved others from some life-threatening tragedy! We do not even have the right to help the afflicted, for that is why society has instititued the "specialists" in those "helping areas" like the police officer and the medical technician. This society has no place for the Way, for the King of kings to really be a King of the cosmos, but it needs a cultured, impotent faith that is about a "personal" king of each "personal" individual - the "personal" being are his borders.

Therefore, we need to have a way of life in a King that crosses these false borders!

What the church may look like?

It seems that I have created a series of blogs. It was asked of my last post basically what would this look like according to worship, community, architecture, administration, staffing, volunteer, service; and then there is the values that would need to be addressed. I will attempt my best at addressing these yet it should remain in the fore-front that this is a very large range of topics for discussion; therefore I will not be exhaustive.


The first issue is that this new imagination of church begins within the two aspects of worship and community. It is a community that worships, primarily speaking. What this is not then is a community that can gather and never have a real effect on each other. In American life today, a person can have such a fragmented life and generally the common church does nothing nor has realized the resource of overcoming this fragmentation. The fragmentation can be seen in how we can classify our friends; these are my bowling friends; these are my softball friends; these are my fishing buddies; and my church friends. This means that the church needs to become a more primary aspect of the Christian lives. There is also this aspect of volunteerism that needs to be countered. I am not going to unpack that term but what I am trying to say is that there needs to be some real honest, committed people to each other to go through the thick and the thin.


As for the architecture, I am torn and am not done trying to figure this aspect out. I went and listened to an Armenian Apostolic church father speak about his church’s liturgy. We were in the sanctuary of his church and it was one of the most theologically beautiful things that I have seen. Everything had its place and symbolic meaning; meaning that the space was holy. Likewise, I seen churches function the space out of a functionality mode where most everything was changeable and movable, to allow multiple uses for the space.


The staffing structure would have to become different as well, I think. The CEO-type of leadership just does not fit and makes us Christians unconsciously think that we are a non-profit organization which means hence a business. The church is not a business. Likewise the idea of volunteers has to change. When I clean my own house or do something to further my family along the path of life, I am not volunteering my time. This goes for the church as well. If we are a business then, yes, volunteers are necessary for the non-profit to function. If we are going to think of ourselves differently then we need to describe what we do differently. It’s sort of like being at home with my children when my wife leaves. I am not babysitting though a babysitter would do essentially the same thing. It is just different. What we do as Christians in church is different than volunteering my time with a secular community program.


Service becomes a way of life. We tend to think of our lives in compartments and service/good deeds become another compartment. We should be gathered in such a way that provides us to live a life of service. We should have a way of life in the church that provides safety to a person who may lose a job because he or she went above and beyond the traditional modes of service and hospitality. I have seen only glimpses of this in my life, yet the church has the resources to achieve this way of life.


Finally, there may not be one way that this church will look like, because all people are different and all places are different, therefore the churches will be gathering under different circumstances. It is like saying that if we were in Russia right now talking about this, my whole article would be different because there are different ideals and ways of life that we would be different from.


Though I do not have tangible community for this, I would say that I hear that congregations in places are trying to become something like this. I would say that some sort of contemporary monastic-type of look will take place, and that I intend to bring my future congregation or life to witness to this.

the church's response to the thread

In my previous post, I spoke briefly about the thread of culture that runs through the tapestry of America. This thread was summarized by democratic and capitalistic values that create a rabid individualism. I want to address that there may be a response to this from the Church which is the Body of Christ.

Generally speaking, regardless of what cultures we are talking about, when they are found in America and the clashes are happening on this land, the basic presuppositions that they need to have is that basic democratic, capitalistic, individualism. Therefore, the clashes are really not clashes at all but a different way of articulating the same thing. Its six to one, half a dozen to another.

What I am saying is that the Church actually has the resources and story to overcome and become a real alternative to the democratic, capitalistic, individualism of America. Now, in my experience of overhearing conversations about such, there seems to be this lack of imagination among the participants of the conversation, namely the parties that may like being a democratic, capitalistic, individual. It seems that there are only two other options to being a democratic, capitalistic, individual; a socialist or a communist.

I am not saying that the Church needs to become either of these options and in fact, saying that these are the only two other options to a democratic, capitalistic, individualistic lifestyle exemplifies a lack of imagination. A lack of imagination that hinders people from seeing the Church as it really is, a political enterprise unto itself. I suppose the American Republicanism ideal has some of the blame for this, for the effects of this cause has blinded us. We no longer see the Church but as an aggregate of like-minded individuals, whereas the Bible story tells us something completely different. The Church is the Body of Christ (found in Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12) where we come together as a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, (the Church, not America for America did not exist during New Testament times) a people belonging to God. (1 Peter 2.9)

This means that we can come together and be a people together, a people that does not need to have "rights" to get along. For rights act as a trump in order to protect individuals who no longer can trust one another, in order to live in some sort of proximity of each other (this can be seen with the stories I have read about children divorcing from their parents through a system of rights). Likewise, being the Church gives us the resources that no longer have to force us to chase after the profits and gains of money. Money is still needed for life but it no longer needs to be my money and your money and his money but our money. It is not that we pool ALL of our money together but that we see our money as one avenue for the service of God. This does not mean some of our money but All of it. That means we give to the poor, and we give to those in the Body that need it. Likewise we can have other means for support and security, like depending upon the Body for support of the family and children (widows and orphans: James 1.27) as opposed to life insurances.

Yet, this can only begin to take shape when we gather not as democratic, capitalistic, individuals but as members of the Body of Christ and members of each other, carrying each others burdens (galations 6). Only then will we realize and remember our polity as the Church.

It will be only then that we will begin to find real communion in the midst of freedom.

Multiculturalism

Multiculturalism has been recently brought back to my attention. This, I think, is an interesting topic for discussion and it has shown itself in all places that I have studied. Now I do not really know what is meant by “multiculturalism” but I do know that when I was up in northern Minnesota by the reservations, there were cultural clashes going on. I have moved into western Chicagoland and there are cultural clashes going on. Even the move from a smaller, more rural northern Minnesota to the ‘burbs in Illinois became a culture shock for myself. I understand that even some have called America a melting pot of culture and people, there are way more cultures within America than I thought.


Yet there is room to consider if there is something (like a thread in a tapestry) that runs through the minds of the people that live in this land between the oceans. Because in the midst of all the multi-cultures, I believe that there are some commonalities found here. In other words, it is not a chaotic smorgasbord. I think that these threads are:


· Democratic values
· Capitalistic values
o Both lead to individualism


Let me expound a little on what I mean by these.
Democratic values are valuing such things as “equal rights” or even the terms of “rights”; “fairness”; or “equality” is democratic values. This essentially leads to an essential view of humanity as individuals because to live in a democracy, you have to be an individual. This is seen in the tangible ways such as voting which is “one voice equals one vote.” A person does not vote because of tradition, family, or arbitrary laws but based on what they value (which seems to usually fall in line with the democratic or republican party which seems to be dictated by issues of money). Equal rights are not based upon tradition, creeds, townships or customs but upon individuals. Essentially it becomes my “rights” vs. your “rights” and the law is to arbitrate between the two parties so they do not kill each other, while still having to choose between the two who is in the right and who will be in the wrong. Equality and fairness are not based upon the differences between peoples or sexes but are based upon an assumed sameness between people; this sameness being that we are all essentially individuals.


Capitalistic values are concerned with the acquisition and accumulation of personal wealth. It becomes about saving and spending, investing in retirement and in insurances, it is about becoming individually rich. It is the economic value that can create a situation where the poorest neighborhoods become islands surrounded by the richest neighborhoods and people generally will not see the problems with this. It creates a life where people can live in apartments and not know the neighbors. It creates an understanding that the poor are really getting rich off of begging or are at best just lazy or have not learned the lessons they should learn from choosing to be poor in the first place.


Hence, people are taught to essentially see themselves as individuals. Rousseau said it best in his work Social Contract that man was born free but is everywhere in bondage. This is telling us that to become free again we have to release ourselves from the bondages that surround us, which means also from each other.

Where I want to go from here is to see if there is a alternative to this.