Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Insiders and outsiders
I am reading Walter Brueggemann's book, The Bible Makes Sense, in which the distinguished Old Testament scholar offers several perspectives on Biblical interpretation. One line of reasoning that Brueggemann pursues, in addressing the narrative of the Bible, is to say:
"This is the most important story we know, and we have come to believe it is decisively about us. This story is clearly for the insiders, and no effort at all is made to persuade or convince outsiders." (p.46)
My initial doubts are being supplanted as I give this some consideration. Perhaps it is just this idea that makes Christianity vulneralbe to such works of fiction as The Da Vinci Code and the Gospel of Judas. Even more alarmingly, that vulnerability is extended into the church through ignorance, apathy and shallowness. One recent conversation with a couple provides an illustration.
"What kind of church is this?"
Christian. We believe in and follow Jesus Christ.
"OK, but like, what kind of Christian church is this?"
Um, we are a Bible believing, independent congregation.
"Are you full gospel or mainline?"
Well, we do believe in the entire gospel.
" Are you charismatic or liturgical?"
Hmm, we do believe in an active and present Holy Spirit. But what do you mean by liturgical?
"You know, are you traditional or contemporary?"
(Deep sigh.)
My sigh was less for their questions than for my hesitation, or paucity of answers. I live and breathe the chhurch. I read about the church. I write about the church. I study and preach and teach about the church. My passion is the church. I think vacation reading on the beach involves authors like Wright, Foster, Willard, McLaren, Brueggemann and Merton. How is it that I could come up short of words on my favorite subject in the whole world? My frustration was two-fold: (1) The rapid reduction of our society’s conversation about Christ’s church to mere bandying of such cliches and over-used labels. And, (2) My total lack of preparedness in having a catchy, bumper-sticker type witty retort on the end of my tongue – ready to dazzle this new family with my hipness and intellectual swagger.
Alright, I realize there is some tension there. But go with me on this. I guess I could have said We are a missional community, but I don't know if they woul have been any closer to understanding. For starters, I'm not sure that their intentions were, well ... honorable. There was a suspicion in the back of my mind that I was being put to a test. You kow, if we didn't toe the pure theological line of Reformation - Scottish Presbyterian -- Annabaptist -- Restoration -- Campbellite/Stone ... well we'd probably be headed for hell! Which was a question that plagued me far too much in my early Christian life. Even in the beginning years of ministerial work, I was too captivated by who was going to heaven and who wasn't. Every issue was a chance to jump the hurdle of orthodoxy or heresy. Like McLaren, time and (hopefully) wisdom have comvinced me that we ask that question too much. And it's not even our question to ask.
OK, so I've taken the scenic route to ask this question: How do you describe your church/community/family of faith? Because in some measure, 'what kind of church is this' translates into 'what kind of Christian are you?' And I'm searching for precise, catchy, thoughtful, clever, not cliched, ways to describe to outsiders just who I am. And who we are. Part of my trouble here is that I am in transition, and so many words that I possess come attached with baggage. But an ever greater difficulty is that much of what I believe about the church does not seem to evidence itself in the at-large perception of "churches." So for me, to ask this question is to try and establish how/where missional Christianity can co-exist within traditional church structures in America?
I wish I had the answer .... but I am still looking.
Peace,
harry
"This is the most important story we know, and we have come to believe it is decisively about us. This story is clearly for the insiders, and no effort at all is made to persuade or convince outsiders." (p.46)
My initial doubts are being supplanted as I give this some consideration. Perhaps it is just this idea that makes Christianity vulneralbe to such works of fiction as The Da Vinci Code and the Gospel of Judas. Even more alarmingly, that vulnerability is extended into the church through ignorance, apathy and shallowness. One recent conversation with a couple provides an illustration.
"What kind of church is this?"
Christian. We believe in and follow Jesus Christ.
"OK, but like, what kind of Christian church is this?"
Um, we are a Bible believing, independent congregation.
"Are you full gospel or mainline?"
Well, we do believe in the entire gospel.
" Are you charismatic or liturgical?"
Hmm, we do believe in an active and present Holy Spirit. But what do you mean by liturgical?
"You know, are you traditional or contemporary?"
(Deep sigh.)
My sigh was less for their questions than for my hesitation, or paucity of answers. I live and breathe the chhurch. I read about the church. I write about the church. I study and preach and teach about the church. My passion is the church. I think vacation reading on the beach involves authors like Wright, Foster, Willard, McLaren, Brueggemann and Merton. How is it that I could come up short of words on my favorite subject in the whole world? My frustration was two-fold: (1) The rapid reduction of our society’s conversation about Christ’s church to mere bandying of such cliches and over-used labels. And, (2) My total lack of preparedness in having a catchy, bumper-sticker type witty retort on the end of my tongue – ready to dazzle this new family with my hipness and intellectual swagger.
Alright, I realize there is some tension there. But go with me on this. I guess I could have said We are a missional community, but I don't know if they woul have been any closer to understanding. For starters, I'm not sure that their intentions were, well ... honorable. There was a suspicion in the back of my mind that I was being put to a test. You kow, if we didn't toe the pure theological line of Reformation - Scottish Presbyterian -- Annabaptist -- Restoration -- Campbellite/Stone ... well we'd probably be headed for hell! Which was a question that plagued me far too much in my early Christian life. Even in the beginning years of ministerial work, I was too captivated by who was going to heaven and who wasn't. Every issue was a chance to jump the hurdle of orthodoxy or heresy. Like McLaren, time and (hopefully) wisdom have comvinced me that we ask that question too much. And it's not even our question to ask.
OK, so I've taken the scenic route to ask this question: How do you describe your church/community/family of faith? Because in some measure, 'what kind of church is this' translates into 'what kind of Christian are you?' And I'm searching for precise, catchy, thoughtful, clever, not cliched, ways to describe to outsiders just who I am. And who we are. Part of my trouble here is that I am in transition, and so many words that I possess come attached with baggage. But an ever greater difficulty is that much of what I believe about the church does not seem to evidence itself in the at-large perception of "churches." So for me, to ask this question is to try and establish how/where missional Christianity can co-exist within traditional church structures in America?
I wish I had the answer .... but I am still looking.
Peace,
harry
