Saturday, December 8, 2012

Why we are all at least “implicitly” guilty in regards to the death of Jacintha Saldanha.


In my opinion we are implicitly guilty in regards to the death of Jacintha Saldanha because we are the ones who collectively created the culture, context, environment, atmosphere, conditions (whatever you want to call it) that fostered the event of the prank call, the magnitude of the reaction and the severity of the humiliation (be that real or only perceived).

(For those unaware, Jacintha was one of the nurses involved in caring for Katherine Middleton during a recent hospital stay. She was also the victim of a prank phone call and responsible for forwarding the pranksters call through to nurses caring for Kate on the ward).
 
You and I are not explicitly responsible for the recent and tragic death of Jacintha Saldanha. Obviously embarrassed for falling for the pranksters trick call, perhaps fearful of losing her job, likely distort and humiliated that her error had gone viral, that she was the brunt of a globally televised joke; Jacintha tragically chose to end her life. Neither you nor I are responsible for this. It was Jacintha’s choice. We don’t know what else was happening in her life, this may have been “the straw that broke the camel’s back”, it was still Jacintha’s choice. Truth be told however, when news broke in regards to the death of Jacintha, it wasn’t too hard to appreciate that the story unfolded as it tragically did.

Implicitly though, we (I think) are all somewhat guilty in regards to the death of Jacintha. Nothing ever happens devoid of a context, an environment, a culture. Why was a prank call made? Why did radio dj’s in Australia call a hospital in England? Why did a nurse expecting to spend a shift aiding the ill, suddenly find herself the brunt of laughter and mocking all around the world (or at least feeling like she was)? I think because we’ve created the kind of conditions that lead to this being, in the words of the Matrix’s Agent Smith, an "inevitability."
1: We buy into and perpetuate a cult of celebrity to one degree or another.

Whether you have any interest in Will and Kate as celebrities or not we’ve still managed to create a cult of celebrity. We have television programs, tabloids and blogs etc dedicated to tracking the lives of celebrities – and they come in every shape and form. We have the rich, the famous, the important, the trendy, the haves. We’ve those with “status” and those without. God’s intention in Christ Jesus however is the undoing of status, that there would be neither Jew nor Gentile, slave nor free, male nor female but rather an appreciation of the dignity, value and worth of all humanity, and that all would be found as one in Christ. Truth be told however, we even have celebrities in the church scene.
2: We buy into and perpetuate entertainment at the expense of others, even the humiliation of others.

We laugh at prank calls, designed to deceive, wind up, make fun of and even manipulate the emotions of others for our entertainment. Things like in this case, radio stations prank calls, Wind Your Wife Up, Punked and so on. At times it seems harmless enough, but we all know what it’s like to be humiliated, it’s unbelievably shameful. So often mocking results at the expense of someone’s innocence, someone is entirely unaware of what is going on and they are exploited. We too easily sit in the seat of mockers knowing all too well how much we despise being mocked and made fun of.
3: We’re quick to pass on the misfortune of others and/or we’re quick to read, take note of, dwell on, and essentially consume the misfortune of others.

Rather than focusing on that which is true, noble, just, pure, lovely or worth of a good report; the virtuous and the praise worthy, we’re consumed with passing on or hearing about the misfortune of others. More often it is the negative report that is dwelt on rather than the positive. More often the headlines are attacking rather than building and encouraging. Media perpetuates this and social media perpetuates this.

Sin is to miss the mark, to fall short of representing God as the image bearers we were created to be. It manifests itself in the choices we make as individuals for sure but it is also systemic. Collectively we create cultures, systems and environments contrary to the ways of God. We live within these systems attempting to resist their pull, living “in the world” but hopefully “not of the world.” At times we are all victims within these systems. At other times we are perpetrators of these systems; we contribute to them being what they are. I would say we’ve all contributed to a “sinful system” in which as I stated the events of the last few days unfolded with a sense of inevitability.

The cult of celebrity we’ve created meant a lady sick in pregnancy couldn’t be left in privacy, even in hospital. A prank was made, because it entertains us, we consume it. It was at the expense of another’s innocence and their humiliation. We laughed. We showed others. We passed it around the world. It was deemed worthy to make headline news all over the world. Because of a cult of celebrity, because of our desire to laugh and pass things on, an innocent and incredibly localised mistake (that could be dealt with locally) became a globalized mistake. I’d imagine it’s pretty hard to have the world laughing at you.    

Now the degree to which you might feel like you have or haven’t contributed to this kind of culture is something you’d have to work out for yourself. I think we’re all guilty to one degree or another, but truthfully it’s not my place to judge and maybe my claims are too all encompassing. You’ll have to work it out for yourself.

Ever watched Punked? Ever listened to Wind Your Wife Up on the Rock (or whatever it is)? Ever listened to Guido Hatzis? Ever laughed at someone’s misfortune? Passed it on? Ever tuned into E Television? Ever got your photo taken with someone “famous” or their signature and proudly displayed it to the world? Ever wished you were famous and not “ordinary”?

Grace and peace to your family Jacintha Saldanha, your friends and loved ones and all you leave behind this Christmas season.

Caveat: The following is written notwithstanding all sorts of details in regards to the death of Jacintha that are unknown. The photo is from Google images and to the best of my knowledge is Jacintha.

 

 

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

Miroslav Volf - Values When Voting

With the United States facing a presidential election this year, Miroslav Volf has been posting in Facebook some thoughts regarding issues that influence his decision as a voter. They are well worth reading and reflecting on as all too often votes are cast based on a single issue of benefit to voters (like student loan interest write offs) with little consideration given to a bigger picture.
He considers it important to know three things in regards to responsibly selecting a candidate for office.
1. Values the candidate stands for and there order of priority.
2. Ways and means by which these values will be implemented.
3. The capacity (ability and determination) of the candidate to contribute to the values being out worked.
Volf has 20 values which he intends to highlight and has already posted in regards to 7 of them. In regards to each value he 1) names the basic content of the value, 2) gives a brief rationale for holding it, 3) suggests some parameters of legitimate debate about it, and 4) identifies key questions for the candidate.
 
Volf is a world renowned theologian and writes from a Christian perspective. He acknowledges that whole books have been written on the values he is discussing and simply posts a couple of verses to flag the direction of his rationale rather than as a concise argument regarding each value.
Here are values 2, 5, and 7 as a teaser. You can find the others on his Facebook page and track the 13 he is yet to post on.

Value # 2: Concern for the Poor. The poor—above all those without adequate food or shelter—deserve our special concern.
Rationale: “When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor and for the foreigner residing among you. I am the LORD your God” (Leviticus 23:22). “However, there need be no poor people among you, for in the land the LORD your God is giving you to possess as your inheritance, he will richly bless you.” (Deuteronomy 15:7).
Debate: There should be no debate whether fighting extreme poverty should be one of the top priorities of the government. That is a given. The debate should be about the following issues: How to generate a sense of solidarity with the poor among all citizens? In poverty alleviation, what is the proper role of governments and what of individuals, religious communities, and civic organizations? What macroeconomic conditions most favour lifting people out of poverty? What should the minimum wage be?
Questions: Is overcoming extreme poverty a priority for the candidate? What poverty reducing polices is the candidate prepared to fight for?no poor people among you, for in the land the LORD your God is giving you to possess as your inheritance, he will richly bless you” (Deuteronomy 15:7).

Debate: There should be no debate whether fighting extreme poverty should be one of the top priorities of the government. That is a given. The debate should be about the following issues: How to generate a sense of solidarity with the poor among all citizens? In poverty alleviation, what is the proper role of governments and what of individuals, religious communities, and civic organizations? What macroeconomic conditions most favor lifting people out of poverty? What should the minimum wage be?

Question: Is overcoming extreme poverty a priority for the candidate? What poverty reducing policies is the candidate prepared to fight for?

Value # 5: Death should never be as punishment for a crime.
Rationale: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). Since out of love Christ died for absolutely every human being (“the world”), no one should rob a human being of a chance to be transformed by God’s love and no one should put to death a human being who has been transformed by God’s love.
Debate: There is no debate on this one.
Questions: Will the candidate push to abolish capital punishment, and if so, how hard?

Value # 7: Given the world’s resources, no human being should go hungry; as individuals and nation we should be committed to complete eradication of hunger.
Rationale: “[The Lord] executes justice for the oppressed […] gives food to the hungry” (Psalm 146:7); “Then he [the Son of Man] will say to those at his left hand, ‘You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink” (Matthew 25:41-42).
Debate: The debate should not be whether the eradication of world hunger out to be one of our top priorities, but what are the most effective ways to achieve that goal.
Questions: Is the candidate committed to the eradication of world hunger, and if so, what means will they use toward that goal? Is the candidate prepared to set aside a percentage of the Gross National Product for the eradication of hunger?l fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink” (Matthew 25:41-42).

Debate: The debate should not be whether the eradication of world hunger ought to be one of our top priorities, but what are most effective ways to achieve that goal.

Question to Ask: Is the candidate committed to the eradication of world hunger, and if so, what means will he use toward that goal? Is the candidate prepared to set aside a percentage of the Gross National Product for the eradication of hunger?

ave eternal life” (John 3:16). Since out of love Christ died for absolutely every human being (“the world”), no one should rob a human being of a chance to be transformed by God’s love and no one should put to death a human being who has been transformed by God’s love.

Debate: There is no debate on this one.

Question to Ask: Will the candidate push to abolish the capital punishment, and if so, how hard?

Most important are the values. As I identified each value, I thought it important to (1) name the basic content of the value, (2) give a brief rationale for holding it, (3) suggest some parameters of legitimate debate about it, and (4) identify key questions for the candidate.

Most important are the values. As I identified each value, I thought it important to (1) name the basic content of the value, (2) give a brief rationale for holding it, (3) suggest some parameters of legitimate debate about it, and (4) identify key questions for the candidate.

I write as a Christian theologian, from the perspective of my own understanding of the Christian faith. Whole books have been written on each of these values, explicating them and adjudicating complex debates about them. In giving rationale for a given value, I only take one or two verses from the Bible to back up my position, more to flag the direction in which giving a rationale would need to go than in fact strictly to offer a rationale. I have identified some 20 such values. In coming days I will post one a day.

 

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

St Luke’s – The BIG Story of the Bible

Despite the church existing in a postmodern context suspicious of any big story out of which ultimate truth can be found or meaning in regards to our own stories; at St Luke’s we are convinced that the BIG Story of the Bible is an overarching story of truth in which we make sense of all of life’s sub stories.

Our conviction is that the bible tells us the true history of God at work in the world. Not like a technical history book, as modern science would understand history to be, but in a mixture of historical stories, poems, songs, pithy sayings, occasional letters and various other genres.

To simplify it, the story tracks through six main acts...

Creation
Fall
Israel
Jesus
Church
Recreation

We’re living in act 5 where God, while at work everywhere in all sorts of ways, is working in the world through the church. The church is to live out the BIG Story of the Bible as faithful followers of Christ, walking the Way of Jesus and existing as a living representation of Christ in the world. The church is to continue God’s reconciling and restorative work in the world, looking forward to the return of Jesus and God renewing all things.
Leslie Newbigin asks...
How is it possible that the gospel should be credible, that people should come to believe that the power which has the last word in human affairs is represented by a man hanging on a cross? What is the most effective vehicle through which a scandalous gospel can be communicated so that it is credible?
He answers...
I am suggesting that the only answer, the only way to explain the gospel, is a congregation of men and women who believe it and live by it. No amount of brilliant argument can make it sound reasonable to the inhabitants of the reigning plausibility structure. That is why I am suggesting that the only possible explanation of the gospel is a congregation which believes it.[1]

The BIG Story of the Bible, the Gospel of Jesus, isn’t an add on addition that will give us a head start in our race to live the dream of a nice house, a nice job, a nice car, nice holidays, and a nice life.  Rather, the gospel has the potential to totally undo our pursuit of all and everything that might be considered ‘living the dream’ and offers us a different way of living, a different understanding of what really matters in life, it offers us a different dream.

In living life in the light of the BIG Story of the Bible, one of our challenges is to do the best we can to properly exegete both the bible and our 21st Century post-modern culture. What does the bible teach here? What’s going on in our world here? What happens when we bring these two things together? We want to live in the light of God’s word and its intent and meaning to the original readers, totally committed to the reality that it has meaning and truth for us today.

The bible offers us a grand-narrative of God at work throughout history. In truth it tells us that history is indeed HIStory; a meaningful story originating in love and purpose that is heading towards a beautiful mind-blowing conclusion. We want to live in the light of this story. The life giving, transformational, challenging, inviting, moving, all encompassing, subversive, counter intuitive, upside-down, passionate story of God’s love and plan for His creation.

At times understanding this big story and understanding the smaller stories found in the Bible seems straightforward and common sense. On other occasions it’s not so easy.

At times it is easy to embrace the challenges of Jesus’ teaching. On other occasions, like it was for the disciples, so easy to miss the point.

At times God’s word seems life changing and refreshing. On other occasions it seems dry and difficult to swallow.

In all of this we’re committed to gathering around God’s word each Sunday and to allowing it to transform our lives.

The Story is counter culture to the Western story of individualism, self made success, consumerism, materialism, self gratification etc. Lay down your life, take up your cross, don’t worry about clothes you wear, two jackets give it to the person who has none, food, give it to those that don’t have food, you that are rich in this age, give more.

The Story that isn’t content to leave people where they are at, is content to avoid risking upsetting or interrupting someone’s life, but a story that actually turns someone’s life upside down, calls and sends them.

At St Luke’s were committed to the ongoing process of getting lost and found in the BIG  Story of God.



[1] Lesslie Newbigin, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989), 227-232.

Thursday, July 12, 2012

St Luke's - Truth and Humility

The church finds itself existing in a postmodern context that is suspicious of institutions, organisations, experts, and people that claim to have all the answers or have discovered the truth. We’re surrounded by people suspicious of the way organisations use and interpret texts to suit their own ends. So of course, it’s not surprising to discover that average Joe is suspicious of the church and how the biblical text has been ‘used and misused’ by the ‘experts’ up the front to advance their own agendas. Heck Pastor Joe (me) is suspicious of that.

And yet as Christ followers we affirm the Bible authoritative and inspired by God. We believe it contains ultimate truth, a grand-narrative, a big story which gives meaning to all of human existence and out of which we can make sense of our own stories. We’re people of the Spirit. We’re people of the text – the Bible.

In a postmodern context you could say it is a little stacked against us!

An yet I believe in the possibility, potential, and the ability of the church to shine brighter than it ever has, to make more of a difference in the world than she already has, to offer the world faith, hope and love in the midst of confusion, hopelessness and heartache.

Mindful of our context we seek each time we gather to speak the truth out of love, with grace and in humility, understanding that we may not have it all exactly right – though we are more than confident of being on the right track.

We’re called to shine boldly as a light and also flavour subversively in the world around us, pointing people towards Jesus and working towards the Kingdom of God being established on earth as in heaven.


At St Luke’s we’re more about out working this in humble conversation. Sermons are talks to start talks not talks to end talks, the opening word rather than the final word. We won’t yell at you, but at the same time we won’t shy away. Humility isn’t weak it’s just inviting.

To be continued...

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

St Luke's - In a Postmodern & Post-Christian World

The church is by nature a number of things...

Those who have responded to the call to follow Jesus (to pledge their allegiance and worship to the Lordship of the Creator God revelled in Father, Son and Spirit).


Those that are “alive” in Christ and the gathering of those that are alive in Christ.
Those that gather united in baptism and communion.
Those that live out of and in witness to the big story of the Gospel.
An integrated renewed humanity in community (an eclectic bunch of people sourced from here, there and everywhere but who have all found life in Jesus Christ).

You could say that the church is; a community that gathers and scatters as followers of Jesus in order to encourage, equip and help each other in the active living out of God’s will and in order to bear witness in both word and deed to the truth and love of God.

Why St Luke’s then? Why plant a church?

The short answer is in response to God’s calling, leading and prompting. At an intuitive level I felt God was leading us (Lisa and I, and then what became a church planting team) to plant a church.

Now we all know that churches can work out their ‘churching’ in a variety of ways.

So what about St Luke’s...?

All along we wanted to do this in a way that would resonate somehow with the postmodern and post-Christian context that we live in; with those that know Christ in this context and with those that don’t.

St Luke’s isn’t a postmodern church. I’m not sure that is possible as, at the end of the day, a Christian worldview and a postmodern worldview are not really compatible. We have set out however to speak into a postmodern context.

Let me explain that a bit, and yes I’m cutting out as much guff as possible, and yes, the story is a little more nuanced than what follows...

First we had the enlightenment:

A cultural movement of intellectualism in the 1700’s that sought to mobilize the power of reason, in order to reform society and advance knowledge. It promoted science and intellectual interchange and opposed superstition. It is the foundation to what is known as modernism, our modern way of living; scientific, technical, rational, logical, educated, reasoned etc. It carries with it the idea that we’ll fix the world as humanity advances intellectually and one by one thinks and fixes and invents solutions to the world‘s problems and humankind's deepest fears and desires.

Now we have postmodernism:

As time as carried on we’ve discovered that science isn’t going to fix everything. Despite the great advances in philosophy, medicine, humanitarian work, education, capitalism – the world is a pretty broken place. Science couldn’t fix or prove everything. Postmodern thinkers began to declare truth as relative,[1] to become suspicious of literary texts and our ability to truthfully interpret the text,[2] and to doubt any sort of metanarrative[3] by which sense could be made of life.

Imagine a flyer in your mail box from Shell Oil explaining their new environmentally friendly and sustainable oil - who wrote this? Why? Can they be trusted? What’s their agenda?  Who can you trust? Who are the experts? This is just their version of the story, it’s not necessarily the only version or the truest version, in fact it’s most likely not!


There is suspicion of truth, suspicion of the text, suspicion of the expert (who’s paying them), a suspicion of institutions, a suspicion that any particular story is a true story let alone the true story. All is relative.

We live in a postmodern context.

At the same time we live in what is very much a post-Christian society.

First we had Christendom:

Christendom is the religious culture that has dominated Western society since the 4th Century. Prior to this the Western world was pre-Christian. Greek gods, Roman gods, and Caesar were considered as lord. It was criminal to be a Christian at times. Christians were thrown to lions in the arena or killed by gladiators. In the 4th Centruy the Roman emperor Constantine made Christianity the official imperial religion. Christian faith moved from being a marginalized, persecuted, subversive movement to being the official religion. Church gatherings moved from underground catacombs to large temples that were specifically built. The Emperor worshiped in temple in all his finery and so gowns and robes and the like were acquired for the priests to wear and conduct services in, they needed to look the part for the Emperor. The Church and state became one. In many countries the King or Queen was the head of the church as well as the State. Members of society were assumed to be Christian by birth rather than by choice. Over the last 1000 years or so however, there has been a separation of Church and State.

Largely though, until the last generation or so, the church was still held in high regard in society. Countries still considered themselves to be a Christian nation. Everyone went to Sunday school. Priests or Pastors were held in high regard. Church and teachings of the church still held tremendous sway.

Now we have post-Christendom:

Many historians though are now calling the world we live in a post-Christendom society. In many places prayer in schools has been banned, it is being requested that Christmas be renamed as a solstice gift-giving festival, that nativity scenes be removed from shopping malls. You may have seen on the news a few years ago the debate around the monument of the Ten Commandments in the Montgomery State judicial building being taken down. After having been in place for two years it was ruled to be in violation of the U.S. Constitutions principle of a separation between religion and government.

The church, priests, reverends, pastors, prayer, the Christian faith no longer enjoys the same privileged status it once held in western society.

Thus we find ourselves living in a postmodern and post-Christian context.

To be continued...






[1] Francis Watson, Text, Church and World: Biblical Interpretation in Theological Perspective (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1994), 102.


 [2] Mark Poster, “Foucault, Michel,” in The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism (ed. Michael Groden and Martin Kreiswirth; Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994), 277-280.


 [3] Jean-Francois Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984), xxiv.

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Want 14 extra hours? Want to live healthier?

It seems that the average New Zealander watches a little over three hours of television per day.[1] That’s 21 hours a week. Half a standard work week! Across New Zealand that’s around 12 million hours a day; a total of around 500,000 years (per year) that goes into television. That’s a lot of people-power hours, even if not the best hours.  


As much as anyone else I understand that sometimes at the end of the day, work over, kids in bed etc all you want to do is put your feet up and chill in front of the TV, watch a sit-com, a sci-fi, some sport or a movie. Some people are physically drained and want to chill. Some people are mentally drained and want to chill. Others are emotionally or intellectually exhausted. No argument from me.

I wonder though if we might be a little healthier if we cut out some of the TV and replaced it with something else? Of course we would! We all know this.

My suggestion is that you consider reducing your television viewing from 21 hours per week to 14 hours. Not too drastic. Now there are all sorts of meaningful ways you could spend an extra 7 hours. Here are a couple of suggestions that are simply focused on health.

With the 7 hours you free up you could consider…

1.   Reading for 4 hours per week – if your reading and comprehension abilities are only average it would take you less than 3 weeks to read a standard 300 page book. You’d actually get through about 19 books in a year. That’s pretty good going! And… if you made sure nine of these were non-fiction books by reputable writers that’s a fair amount solid download! You’ll be exercising the mind and this is an incredibly healthy habit. As you read more you’ll also become a better reader with your comprehension and wpm count going up. If your job is fairly intellectually demanding read something that is outside your field of work but an interest you have and you’ll find it energizing rather than draining.  

2.   Exercise for 3 hours per week – you’d be amazed at the results you can achieve in 3 solid work outs per week, be they running, weights, boxing, cross training etc. If you are pushing yourself and eating well you’ll burn fat, build muscle tone, release endorphins, sweat out toxins etc. Again you know how good this is for you. You just have to do it!  

Now of course, if you're just watching TV to "unwind" you could always consider ditching another 5 hours of TV, bring your total viewing time down to 9 hours (still a fair bit) and have an extra 5 hours of sleep per week. If your mind is being exercised and your body is being exercised (and properly feed) the other component for health that we need is rest. Sitting on the couch watching TV isn’t even close to the same thing as sleeping. The five hours extra per week, an hour per week night, will energize and increase your efficiency across the rest of the day. You’ll cope with stress better, your kids better, and your husband/wife better. You’ll work smarter, you’ll think clearer and you’ll be better for it.

All you have to do is turn television off and engage!



[1] Statistics in online articles vary a little but there seems to be a general agreement on this figure.

Tuesday, July 3, 2012

Concerning the Church - Part 3

The church is to exist as a witness to the gospel and is to model to the world: grace, love, forgiveness, kindness, gentleness, self control, acceptance, patience, sacrifice, a willingness to die to oneself, faith, determination, extra mile living, the laying down of one’s life, service rather than the need to always be served, passion and action for justice, peace as a non-anxious presence in the world, faithful witness, initiative, creativity, light and life in the midst of darkness and death, hope and courage in the face of impossibility and lose. We’re to take up our cross and follow Jesus. We’re to lay down our lives for our fellow men.


Paul really meant it when he said ‘it’s no longer I that live but Christ who lives in me’ and he really meant it when he said ‘come follow me as I follow Christ.’

Full on. For sure!

The call is not to join an institution or to sign a pledge card; it is rather to sign on for a different narrative account of reality that is in profound contrast to the dominant account of reality into which we are all summarily inducted.[1]

Our “doing and living” is to be as people “alive in Christ.”

Philippians 2:5-11
5 In your relationships with one another, have the same attitude of mind Christ Jesus had:
6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a human being,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!


A renewed identity in Christ leads to a new way of living; you are a new creation, act that way!



[1] Walter Brueggemann, The Word That Redescribes the World: The Bible and Discipleship (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006), 95.

Concerning the Church - Part 2

By nature the church is those that are alive in Christ and the gathering and scattering in mission of those that are alive in Christ.

Craig Van Gelder writes this... The church lives in the world as a human enterprise, but it is also the called and the redeemed people of God. It is a people of God who are created by the Spirit to live as a missionary community. As such, the church is both a social organisation and a spiritual community. Empowered by the Spirit the church is God’s personal presence in the world. This makes the church as a spiritual community unique. The church exists as a social reality with human behaviours organised with human structures. But this human behaviour, through the redemptive work of God, is empowered by the Spirit. This is the duality inherent in the church’s nature.[1]

Or in other words, yes as soon as the church gathers, suddenly you need administration and structures and policies and everything else involved in social organisation but: the church is unique as a community empowered by the Spirit as God’s personal presence in the world.

Michael Gorman puts it like this...

The ekklesia is what God is up to in the world: recreating a people whose corporate life tells the world what the death and resurrection of the Messiah is all about. This people, the “Church,” lives the story, embodies the story, tells the story. It is the living exegesis of God’s master story of faith, love, power and hope.[2]

So by nature the church is a counter culture community that lives out of, and in witness to, the big story of the Gospel.


Empowered by the Spirit the church does not live according to the patterns or the ways of this world but rather, transformed by the renewing of the mind; lives, thinks, acts, functions in the world in line with the Good News of the Gospel of Jesus. In doing so the church community bears witness in word and in deed to the reality of the Good News of the Gospel and more specifically the reality of the resurrected Jesus as the way, the truth and the life. The church us to be a living explanation, a living example, a living interpretation of Good News of the Gospel, of the reality of the truth and power of the cross. 

Leslie Newbigin asks...

How is it possible that the gospel should be credible, that people should come to believe that the power which has the last word in human affairs is represented by a man hanging on a cross? What is the most effective vehicle through which a scandalous gospel can be communicated so that it is credible?

He answers...

I am suggesting that the only answer, the only way to explain the gospel, is a congregation of men and women who believe it and live by it. No amount of brilliant argument can make it sound reasonable to the inhabitants of the reigning plausibility structure. That is why I am suggesting that the only possible explanation of the gospel is a congregation which believes it.[3]

And I add, lives it!



[1] Craig Van Gelder, The Essence of the Church (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000), 25.
[2] Michael J. Gorman, Cruciformity: Paul’s Narrative Spirituality of the Cross. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 367.
[3] Lesslie Newbigin, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989), 227-232.

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Concerning the Church – Part 1

When it comes to discussions concerning the church, too often the nature of the church is skipped in favour of discussing the organisation and ministries of the church. Perhaps everyone understands the nature of the church or perhaps differentiating between the nature, ministries, and organisation of the church is considered semantics. Maybe the essential nature of church has been forgotten in amongst the many choices people can make about church. These choices being on one hand brilliant, although on the other, at least potentially misleading.


We need variety of expression, flavour, tone, style, culture and characteristics when it comes to church. This is a healthy “consumer” choice. When we lose sight of the essential nature of the church in favour of her many characteristics though, it is possible that rather than allowing the Church to shape and demand something of us, we allow our expectations, demands, and tastes to become things that instead shape and place demands on the church. "Either put on something we want to consumer or we’ll go somewhere that does." This isn’t the way it is supposed to be, this is consumer choice gone too far.

So when it comes to talking about the church it is essential that we begin by talking about the essence of the church or the nature of the church rather than about the programs, ministries, and organization of the local church.

Walter Brueggemann writes that Christians are those that have responded to “God’s call to disengage from postures, habits, and assumptions that define the world of power and injustice that is so devoid of mercy and compassion in every arena of life. The call is away from ordinary life, ordinary possessions, and ordinary assumptions to a way of life that the world judges impossible. Thus the call is, indeed to an impossibility.”[1]

The church is by nature the gathering and scattering of those who have responded to the call to follow Jesus. Those that have committed to an “alternative” way of living in the world.  Those that, in faith and repentance, have pledged their allegiance and worship to God revelled in Father, Son and Spirit.

The church are those that have turned from false gods, from idolatry, from self governance, from self rule and have determined to follow Jesus as Lord and as Saviour.

The church is a community of atheists in regards to any other gods so often worshiped, pursued, and lived in allegiance to in our day and age...

Individualism – worship of self as the centre of the universe.
Consumerism – worship of consumption, self gratification, the need to posses, the idea that one is what one owns.
Relativism – worship of all truth being equal and that universal truth is unknowable.


The church is all who are ‘in’ Christ, i.e. submitted to the Lordship of Jesus and also more specifically or locally the church is the gathering of those that are in Christ.

The church may own property but she is not a building. The church may gather but she is not an event. The church may minister but she is not a program. The church is a body of people united in baptism and communion - the church is a community.





[1] Walter Brueggemann, The Word That Redescribes the World: The Bible and Discipleship (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006), 95.