Response no. 1
What will follow is my response to a comment left on the wonderful quote blog. There will be three such responses, one for each comment.
The commentor, Elliott davis, to be found on myspace.com (wonderful songwriter), is my closest friend. Certain points of my response take into account years of conversations on this very topic, so if there are any things unclear, please let me know.
The quote:
Institutional Christianity, fearing its very survival, has latched onto "relevance" as the means of security. The adoption of pop culture in services seems to build congregations and so secure viability. Of course, all at the expense of substance. True worship has nothing to do with structure, neither Mount Gerizim nor Jerusalem, but is of "spirit and truth." The glory of this age, this system of things, may seem to secure our survival, even give success, but it will inevitably result in our bondage to darkness
The Response:
agree sir, but what is the solution? i dont think we should return to the past because we have no impact there either. christianity trancends time so how do we relate?
My commentary: These are related to the six statements of the quote itself.
1. I think the problem is not necessarily with "institutional" christianity, but in a particular, very specifically American christianity which attempts to avoid institutionalism while artificially establishing a permanent structure.
2. I agreee that 'relevance" has been the tool of choice, but would point out that it is a problem because it's not useful relevance. The church should not avoid being relevant; being relevant is not a bad thing. Wyhat must be emphasised is the main area of identification with the lost world:sin.
3. If you understand relevance as making the lost comfortable in church, rather than making them conformable to christ, the only method is to infuse the world's culture into public christianity.
4. I agree that substance has been sacrificed, but I do not concede that the quoted author has made his case.
5.Again a good observation, but unproven.
6.This last statement may be true, but is not substantiated.
The question is one of preservation. in the church fathers, the church is the young bride. She is eternal. She has institutional structures to last for eternity, but also lives paradoxically, with the expectation of the immediate culmination of the age. Th kingdom of god is here, and the kingdom of this world is ending. both realities are endemic to the mission of the church.
As to your question, the problem is not really defined in this quote. The real problem with modern worship is false intimacy. the intimacy that ois rightly placed in the private devotions of believers is not the same as the communal prayer of the church. The songs "I want to see you', "open the eyes of my heart". All are me centered. there is never the us element. The us is what the church is. Christ has a body made up of many believers. what has been done is to translate the individusalistic tendencies of twenty first century democrats (little d) and the modern privitization of religion into congregational worship. What we lose is the community of faith praying together. the great "our" of the our father. When there is no real community, there is no need for corporate worship. the only way to create artificial congregational identity, is to have lots of people that come because they have a good time. as long as they come, the illusion of permenance is created. Thats why these small boring churches are failing. it's not because they're boring, people do boring stuff all the time with sufficient motivation. The idea that the act of coming together is itself important has been glossed over.
With faith alone theology, the 'just me and jesus" mindset is easy to fall into. Also, faith alone feeds our notions of self sufficiency, we don't need a church to bring us to God, we come on our own turf. We just may do it together.
the solution is, as i have stated many times for many years, objective, god centered worship. The recognition that our only true relevance in the lost world is that they are dying and we know the path to life. To love them with the love of christ for his sake and theirs. to drop the results oriented competition for converts and bring them into true intimacy with the father. (end)
As you can see, I am less enamored of the quote the more I analyze it. Really, it has become an exercise in discussion. Not a bad thing necessarily.
The commentor, Elliott davis, to be found on myspace.com (wonderful songwriter), is my closest friend. Certain points of my response take into account years of conversations on this very topic, so if there are any things unclear, please let me know.
The quote:
Institutional Christianity, fearing its very survival, has latched onto "relevance" as the means of security. The adoption of pop culture in services seems to build congregations and so secure viability. Of course, all at the expense of substance. True worship has nothing to do with structure, neither Mount Gerizim nor Jerusalem, but is of "spirit and truth." The glory of this age, this system of things, may seem to secure our survival, even give success, but it will inevitably result in our bondage to darkness
The Response:
agree sir, but what is the solution? i dont think we should return to the past because we have no impact there either. christianity trancends time so how do we relate?
My commentary: These are related to the six statements of the quote itself.
1. I think the problem is not necessarily with "institutional" christianity, but in a particular, very specifically American christianity which attempts to avoid institutionalism while artificially establishing a permanent structure.
2. I agreee that 'relevance" has been the tool of choice, but would point out that it is a problem because it's not useful relevance. The church should not avoid being relevant; being relevant is not a bad thing. Wyhat must be emphasised is the main area of identification with the lost world:sin.
3. If you understand relevance as making the lost comfortable in church, rather than making them conformable to christ, the only method is to infuse the world's culture into public christianity.
4. I agree that substance has been sacrificed, but I do not concede that the quoted author has made his case.
5.Again a good observation, but unproven.
6.This last statement may be true, but is not substantiated.
The question is one of preservation. in the church fathers, the church is the young bride. She is eternal. She has institutional structures to last for eternity, but also lives paradoxically, with the expectation of the immediate culmination of the age. Th kingdom of god is here, and the kingdom of this world is ending. both realities are endemic to the mission of the church.
As to your question, the problem is not really defined in this quote. The real problem with modern worship is false intimacy. the intimacy that ois rightly placed in the private devotions of believers is not the same as the communal prayer of the church. The songs "I want to see you', "open the eyes of my heart". All are me centered. there is never the us element. The us is what the church is. Christ has a body made up of many believers. what has been done is to translate the individusalistic tendencies of twenty first century democrats (little d) and the modern privitization of religion into congregational worship. What we lose is the community of faith praying together. the great "our" of the our father. When there is no real community, there is no need for corporate worship. the only way to create artificial congregational identity, is to have lots of people that come because they have a good time. as long as they come, the illusion of permenance is created. Thats why these small boring churches are failing. it's not because they're boring, people do boring stuff all the time with sufficient motivation. The idea that the act of coming together is itself important has been glossed over.
With faith alone theology, the 'just me and jesus" mindset is easy to fall into. Also, faith alone feeds our notions of self sufficiency, we don't need a church to bring us to God, we come on our own turf. We just may do it together.
the solution is, as i have stated many times for many years, objective, god centered worship. The recognition that our only true relevance in the lost world is that they are dying and we know the path to life. To love them with the love of christ for his sake and theirs. to drop the results oriented competition for converts and bring them into true intimacy with the father. (end)
As you can see, I am less enamored of the quote the more I analyze it. Really, it has become an exercise in discussion. Not a bad thing necessarily.
posted by Brother Makarias | 6:04 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home