Over dinner tonight, a good friend asked me if I was yet tired of this emerging church conversation. (?) As we talked through the question, it became clear that he, or at least some of his congregants, want clear definition.
In other words, we prefer a simple gospel that is easily understood. We prefer black and white because it is much simpler. Hmmm. So how does that word 'simpler' look? Why not present a gospel that is easy to digest? Why not say one thing is unequivocally wrong and another thing is unequivocally correct? It makes life easy. It avoids thinking. After all, we're too tired after a hard day of work to think about faith. We're too tired to be thoughtful. Just tell us what to believe preacher man!
And then my mind returns to the gospel. You choose the location. Jesus sitting on the beach as the sun comes over the horizon in the morning or Jesus in the town square or Jesus in a boat... And we have parables that we are still trying to fully understand two thousand years later. Yes, 2000 years later.
I sense that we prefer a simple gospel that is easily read. We prefer believing that everyday Christians can fully understand the text. That's what we want to believe. YET.
Yet, we also foster the belief that seminary, Greek and Hebrew included, as well as good exegesis are important to understanding the biblical text. So, good theologicans are important for a good understanding of the text... but they are not too important.
Ultimately, it gets us in a bind. It's like wearing (excuse me ladies) boxers with a constant weggie. OR, it's like the reformers claiming the 'priesthood of all believers' and yet never giving the congregants (those from the congregation) a platform to speak about what the Spirit is proclaiming in thier lives.
Perhaps I am even a bit conflicted as I hope for a church in homogenious Hudsonville to be embracing of mixed Chrisitan traditions, Christian and public school supporters, lovers of sinners regardless if it happens to be heterosexual lust or homosexual lust. Perhaps I am hoping for a manifestation of the kingdom in a community that has chosen to be an upper middle class community.
Yet, I must continue to hope for a better understanding of the biblical text lived out even in this community. I must take the words of Paul seriously.... faith, hope, and love.
I must hope that at least a few faithful are willing to surrender their pre-conceived notions of right and wrong in order to live more fully into the biblical text. And perhaps that means living a life that is not filled with lots of answers for the congregants. Perhaps it means I learn to ask more faithful questions: How is your marriage really doing? How can I walk with you through this valley of death? (or perhaps even, "May I just walk with you?") May I be your friend even though you're gay and I am not? How can you help me break racial barriers for the sake of my children?
But I'm not sure we're really after faithfulness that requires thoughtfulness. I think we prefer knowing 'right and wrong' in simple form... but it seems to fall a long ways from the gospel of Jesus.
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
"But I'm not sure we're really after faithfulness that requires thoughtfulness. I think we prefer knowing 'right and wrong' in simple form"
That reminds me of something Walter Bruuggemann said about certainty and fidelity. He said that so many Christians are going on and on looking for and talking about certainty, but the Bible doesn't talk about certainty. The Bible talks about fidelity--often (usually?) in ambiguity.
the conversation needs to continue. all conversattions about God and his people need to continue. these conversations, whether emgergen, post-modern or whatever, have been helpful in getting me to refocus life and ministry on being relevant and related to God, just not about programs and schedules. these conversations must continue throughout the people of God! it's Church.
Keep talkin'
Post a Comment