!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> Emerging Women .comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Rising from the Ashes - Week 5
Sorry this is posted a bit late in the day, but I wanted to wrap up this month's discussion of Becky Garrison's Rising from the Ashes. One question that was addressed in the final chapter "Moving Forward" was that of how those interviewed saw technology (blogs, podcasts) as tools to advance the gospel. Technology often plays a prominent role in emerging church and is the main point of connection for quite a few. Obviously we here use technology as a way to engage in conversation which otherwise wouldn't be possible, so I was interested in the responses given to this question. To quote a few -

Nadia Bolz-Weber - "Technology is neutral. The intentionality around its use is what makes it work for good or evil. ... I see me blog as a ministry, a little piece of the Internet for the lunatic fringe of the church." (p. 156)

Cheryl Lawrie - "Only have blogs or podcasts if you have something to say. Technology shouldn't be automatic tool. It isolates and divides communities as much as it brings us together." (p. 158)

Kester Brewin
- "Blogging will settle down. There's currently too much noise... too many people talking for it really to be called a conversation."

Isaac Everett
- "When the gospel was translated into German and people could read the Bible for themselves, it changed theology and it changed the church. Blogs and podcasts are doing similar things; they're leveling the playing field and allowing anyone to be published. Authority and influence aren't mediated commodities anymore."

What is your take on the role of technology in spreading the gospel?

Are there dangers in using mediums like blogs and podcasts?

Do you see blogs as creating too much noise or as means of leveling the field and letting the marginalized have a voice?

Labels: ,

 
posted by Julie at 9:51 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 7 comments
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Rising from the Ashes - Week 4
We continue this week in our discussion of Becky Garrison's Rising from the Ashes: Rethinking Church. I've appreciated reading this book for a number of reason, but especially for how it reveals the diversity of ways people are rethinking how we do church. The interviews included in the book represent voices from different countries and church backgrounds. The issue that appear important and how the church responds differ from context to context. I was especially interested in seeing how the emerging/missional streams are expressed in different countries.

In my American context I see people in this conversation beginning to realize that not all expressions of the emerging conversation are the same, but we often fail to realize how different the conversation is in places like England or Australia (just to limit it to places that share a common language at least!). While such differences are not the main theme of this book, it serves as a good resource to highlight them nonetheless.

In his interview, Jonny Baker mentions the differences between the UK Alternative Worship movement and the emerging conversation. He mentions too that "one of the huge differences between the uk and the us is that in the uk a lot of the emerging stuff has happened in and around the edges of the main denominations - particularly the [church of england]." (p.18). And Steve Croft of England speaks of differing terminology - "the phrase 'Fresh Expression of Church' was a neutral term. We wanted to find a new useful phrase to describe a collective range of phenomenon such as emerging church, alternative worship, and new ways of being the church." (p21).

And when asked why the emerging church conversation has been going on longer in the UK than in the US, Ian Mobsby replied - "because there is more of a crisis of faith in the church in the UK than there is in the US - we are slightly ahead of you in the postmodern context - and this is why Australia and New Zealand are ahead of us both - as they have an increasingly post Christian postmodern culture." (p. 28)

So I ask the questions to us here -

How do you respond to these differences?
Have you noticed how the conversation varies from country to country?
What are the major differences that you see at play?

And it would be great to hear from our members from around the world on this.

Labels: , ,

 
posted by Julie at 12:59 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 7 comments
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Rising from the Ashes - Week 3
This week we continue our discussion of Becky Garrison's Rising from the Ashes. Given the nature of the book as being interviews from a wide variety of people, it is full of various and sometimes contradictory perspectives. But one theme that I found repeated from interview to interview was that of the need for accountability for the church. There seemed to be concern that new expressions of church (like emerging churches) might be prone to dangers because of a lack of structural accountability. Here are a few quotes that address this issue -

Phyllis Tickle - "One of the things emergent has to do, and do soon, is provide some kind of seminary education, instead of simply having people lay hands on someone and say, "You're now a pastor," or having someone set up a blog with a green leaf logo and decide to regard themselves a pastor. Another question has to do with accountability. Some of the gatherings have pastors who may or may not be a tentmaker, that is, who may be making their living elsewhere. If people only have accountability within their own group of thirty or so folk, there's the potential for going off into idiosyncratic theology and/or into a cult of personality." (p. 4)

Martha Grace Reese - "Any time there's some rapidly growing ministry, there are all sorts of contentions, struggles, distractions, confusions, crashes, and burnouts. We all need accountability." (p.14)

- Do you see this same danger/need for emerging churches?
- How do you see such a structure of accountability logistically working?
- Do you think this concern might be greater for those from a high church background as compared to those more familiar with low church structures?
- what sort of accountability do you see existing already in new and emerging churches?


One suggestion that seemed to be a common theme as well was to retain accountability but avoid hierarchy. Many of the voices called for stronger lay leadership and flattened authority -

Isaac Everett - "I love the Episcopal Church and it's been very formative for me over the years, but I'm not entirely comfortable with the hierarchical structures of authority and the way those power dynamics affect the church's culture. Liturgy tends to be very clergy-centric, and the laity are mostly passive during worship. A lot of people out there have become so distrustful of institutions that they have no desire to sit quietly in a pew and listen to an elite authority figure define truth for them. we don't trust the government, we don't trust corporations - why should we trust the church?" (p. 68)

Brian McLaren - "What I think will happen in this emerging church phenomenon is that we'll find a blurring of boundaries so that old hierarchies and institutions are actually part of emerging networks - they're networked in. As a result, everybody has the capacity to learn from, influence, and enrich everybody." (p. 86)

- How do you react to the idea of flattened or horizontal leadership in churches?
- Do you think such a leadership structure would solve problems or cause more problems?
- How do you see such a structure aiding accountability?

Labels: , ,

 
posted by Julie at 4:30 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 7 comments
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Rising from the Ashes - Week 1
For this month's book discussion we will be looking at Becky Garrison's Rising from the Ashes: Rethinking Church. This book is unique in that it presents the reader with interviews of a variety of people rethinking church and worship. A variety of topics are covered as one reads of the ways in which these people are moving the church forward (some of which are emerging/emergent).

In the book one is presented with the direct words of each person interviewed and so receives many differing perspectives. Not all of the statements agree with each other and one quickly realizes that there are many ways to approach new ways of doing/being the church. Over this next month we will explore some of the ideas presented in the book and have the opportunity to go deeper with a few of the people highlighted in the book. I look forward to exploring these ideas together.

Today I want to start where the book starts and discuss the idea of "where are we now." As the church and as a culture, what's going on? A few quotes on this topic stood out to me. I'll list them here and invite you all to respond. How do you react to these quotes? Agree? Disagree? Do they portray the ethos of the time well? What can you add?

Phyllis Tickle - "Evangelicalism has lost much of its credibility and much of its spiritual energy of late, in much the same way that mainline Protestantism has. There's going to be - is, in fact - a whole upheaval, and then the landscape is going to settle back down again as it always does. We have to remember that it's not as if Protestantism came forth in one perfect or cohesive package out of Luther. Almost from the beginning, it had variants like the Confessing and Reformed movements that followed along quickly." p. 3

Diana Butler Bass - "...Once a church community gets to that point, then it opens the possibility for them to do some really serious imaginative work in reworking Christian tradition and to change context - which is what Christians have been doing since before the time of Constantine. It's really exciting work at many levels because it's sort of the deepest kind of connective work to the heart of tradition - that tradition and culture always change. The vocation of God's people: to figure out how the gospel makes sense in each one of these successive ways that we've lived in for the past two thousand years." p.6

Ian Mobsby - "so we find ourselves in a new opportunity of engaging with new forms of mysticism in our culture - which the church has resources for - and that our model of diversity and turning to understandings of the church drawing on the character of God - helps us reframe the church from institutional to community, Eucharist from control to grace, from power priesthood - to powerless priesthood - the post Christendom perspective is key... the need to draw on the ancient - labyrinths and premodern resources - to inform the postmodern are vital." p.27

Kester Brewin - "An emergent faith is not a wishy-washy liberalism by another name. It is a serious attempt to move beyond hard-line positions to a place where we understand the interdependence and inter-relation of things. We must therefore ensure that the back-drop to our movement is not a limp screen of "trendy postmodernism" lit by a dim tea-light of reactionary flight, but a serious engagement with culture and thought, resonating with the ison of the Spirit that calls the body again to re-imagination and re-configuration based on God's radical, bottom-up principles." p. 34-35

Troy Bronsink - "The only way I know how to talk about emergent is to balance this with a farther-sighted hope about missional living and how we're called to participate in the inbreaking Kingdom of God. In other words, the "how" of church is continually reshaped when the Spirit reshapes our imagination of the "why" of church. Emergent is a conversation between folks about a new post-Christendom "why." p.40

Labels: ,

 
posted by Julie at 4:24 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 3 comments