I went to CBD to order some workbooks for our CR group and when I went to check out I discovered I had a copy of Jurgen Moltmann's Science and Wisdom in my shopping cart. So I included it in my order and checked out. The box arrived today and once again I was surprised when I found "Science & Wisdom" in the bottom of the box, since I had promptly forgotten it was included in the order. A bit latter, I sat down for a late afternoon cup of coffee and there sat that book. So I picked it up and flipped to the first chapter and read this...
The scientific explanation of the forces of nature and the constitution of the human being, of social conditions and historical movements - all that is the fate of modern times. Scientific and technological civilization is the task of facing it. What meaning can Christian theology have in a world which has become the world of human beings, and will become so more and more? Where is the compulsion for theological reflection in a world where people no longer have to live with gods and demons, or with mysterious forces in nature and human destiny, but where we are living with 'the bomb' and with revolution? A world in which human beings are no longer dependent on nature, but where nature is dependent on human beings, and where human beings are increasingly delivered over to themselves and to what people like themselves do?
That is quite the opening paragraph. I think this will be a good read!
Facing the brutal truth is one of the keys that Jim Collins and his research team discover in his book, Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap... and Others Don't as measured by profitablity. But the concept of facing or denying the brutal truth about ourselves has been part of the human experience from the get go no matter how you understand the "get go" got going.
In Romans, Paul pulls no punches when it comes to facing the brutal truth about ourselves and our world. Check out Romans 1:18-3:20 then Romans 5:12-21 and then Romans 7:7-24. We have truly made a "mess of me!"
Part of the conversation that's been going on for... Oh, I don't know... a long time, but seems fresh with each generation, is about "nomenclature" or naming conventions. It's an identity thing perhaps... anyway, check out this video and if you have the time some comments posted at Out of Ur which were triggered by a Facebook post by Brian McLaren.
For some reason I couldn't get past the ReCaptcha spam filter to post a reply on Out of Ur, then it hit me that I could post my thoughts right here at 2ndThoughts! So here is my insightful and pithy addition to the current "naming game" conversation among us Christians [:-0] between the use of the words "Christian vs. Christ-follower."
Do any of you remember the "Jesus People?" (Check this out and then Check this out whether you remember or not.) The current naming game highlighted in the vid seems to me to be the current manifestation of an old issue that is certainly not limited to the church (i.e. the ad campaign this vid and many others is cloned form and what gives it it's potency, "I'm a Mac. I'm a PC.".) I hear in this conversation more than just echoes of 1 Corinthians 1 where Paul takes to task the believers who were naming themselves and dividing themselves. (I am of Paul. I am of Apollos, I am of Cephas..." and then there were the really cool folks (i.e. the Mac folks) (...I am of Christ!). ALL of whom were taken to task for taking a tack that was not at all copacetic.
Back to "Jesus People" and "Christian" and any other identity nouns we might come up with. The 1960's were a dynamic time and mixed in with that dynamism was a rather significant outbreak of Christianity among the youth of the time. This ferment among the youth including returns and turns to Christ became so pronounced that names started to be given to those in the movement such as "Jesus Freaks" and/or "Jesus People." This wasn't a self naming within the movement but a name given by those outside who were observing the movement. Same with "Christian." It was a name given by outside observers to a movement that was spreading across the 1st century Roman Empire. "The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch." This naming seems to have stuck because a number of years latter the Roman official, king Agrippa responds to Paul, "Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?"
The point being not to defend the use of "Christian" as the only legitimate identity nomenclature for those who are disciples of Jesus Christ. I'm not convinced that such naming is at all useful in the first place. The point is that the naming was done by the "observing" community and not by the believing community or members of the believing community except when those doing the naming were in fact doing a disservice to the Lord and his church by creating divisions, something we have never seemed to get beyond no matter how enlightened we think ourselves to be evidenced by our on going need to self-differentiate and self-identify. If there was a self-identity term used, it was probably "disciple" and we know that "the Way" was also used early on to describe the movement spawned by the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Still in the end, none of this makes one wit of difference since it is the Lord alone who can and will sort things out and the sorting will have nothing to do with self-identity nomenclature. Here's how the sorting will go, "When I was hungry, you fed me. When I was naked, you clothed me, when I was sick, you comforted me. When I was in prison, you visited me..." and the mark of the disciple will be, "When did we ever see you...."
Now for an aside: I'm just a tad uneasy with the stereotyping going on in the above video and I'm just a bit put off by the assumption that if i use a windows based machine I'm somehow "uncool" as if being "uncool" is somehow less human than the "cool" mac guy. I somehow think that the good folk at Apple aren't quite as concerned with my self-perception in anyway other than to exploit my need to fit in in order to sell me their product. I have the strangest feeling they are manipulating me to get my money (good ol' late capitalist exploitation) more than that they are either truly concerned with or trying to truly help me with my identity issues. ;-)
The short vid with Hauerwas raises the issue of just what are Christians doing when they attend a worship service. My friend Gavin points out the context of Hauerwas' remarks when he responds to my comment on his facebook link with "I appreciate Hauerwas' comments though in this short segment he isn't able to get into what he would see as legitimate liturgy would look like." and Gavin responds, "Go to Mass."
If you have never attended Mass, I'd encourage you to do so. If you do attend Mass and you have never been to Mass before, you will feel awkward because of your unfamiliarity with the liturgy, but set that aside and give yourself the to the prayer and response that the Mass calls for. If you will engage the readings, responses and prayers, you may be surprised at how profoundly you will be engaged by the Gospel and the Word of God.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
i would be interested in any of your feedback on this short critique of "church growth" movement and worship.
this is not a new critique and i'm not convinced that the "entertainment" factor is not new with the now generation+ old "church growth" movement in the u.s. church experience. The one hint i get in this vid that might define what he would see as a non-entertaining liturgy is his passing reference to the worshiper's involvement in prayer and his critique seems to be toward an overemphasis on the sermon or the sermon as entertainment, but i'm guessing that Hauerwas is trying to get at a perceived/real passivity on the part of the attendees.
i went to the website advertised at the end of this vid to see if there would be some discussion about an effective/affective worshiper involving liturgy only to discover that it's a web site that produces and or markets short videos to churches. so, if i include short videos in my worship services will that restore the "work of the people"? this is especially ironic with the juxtaposition of a woman watching tv with Hauerwas' comments... let alone that this is itself a video that leaves the viewer completely passive to begin with.
I'm in a bit of a dry spell these days. My creative juices, what there are of them, seem to be at an especially low ebb over the past few weeks. Some of the ebbing has to do with the seasonal slump that I have during this time of year. But I suppose it is also due to several other factors that are adding up points on the ol' stress meter these days. I've had a busy schedule for the past couple of months along with presenting some ideas to my organization that, if realized, will bring about more than superficial changes in the texture of the organization.
I have to be careful when I venture out on such endeavors since the path form conception of ideas to the realization of those ideas can be a treacherous one for me. Nevertheless, ideas have sprung up, conceptualization has matured, planning has begun, conversations have been initiated, and questions are flowing.
So, I reckon that in reality, it hasn't been as dry a dry spell as I first set out to describe... it's more that my creative juices have been flowing strongly leaving me with less than normal creative energy for blogging... not that there has been that much in the way of creativity going on here anyway.
in my shopping cart. So I included it in my order and checked out. The box arrived today and once again I was surprised when I found "Science & Wisdom" in the bottom of the box, since I had promptly forgotten it was included in the order. A bit latter, I sat down for a late afternoon cup of coffee and there sat that book. So I picked it up and flipped to the first chapter and read this...
