Category: Emerging Church

My Blog Turns 2!

Posted on

So my blog officially turns two today. I know that in the grand scheme of the blogworld that isn’t very old, but its been quite a journey for me. I think the process started a little over two years ago when I attended the 2005 Emergent Gathering in Nashville. We had recently left our jobs at our old church, had no new jobs lined up, and had a three month old baby. At the time – after spending nearly 4 months on strict bedrest (and drugs that prevented me from reading) and not having a full night’s sleep since Emma was born, I was feeling very disconnected. I didn’t think I would ever have functioning use of my brain again. At the Convention, I attended the Emerging Women’s luncheon and ended up at a table with a bunch of women who were in seminary. They spent the whole lunch discussing the conversations they were having on their blogs. I felt so stupid. I could barely put a coherent sentence together much less have anything meaningful to say on a blog. I desperately wanted to be part of the conversation, but didn’t think I had the right or ability to.

Fast forward a couple of months. By then I had realized that nursing a baby gave me large amounts of time to read. Granted, it was only fiction, but I was reading again. So as not to drive Mike nuts by telling him about books he had absolutely no interest in whatsoever, I started a blog. The idea was to post reviews, summaries, and thoughts about the books I was reading. I did do that, occasionally, but mostly I just posted fun blog things and pictures of Emma. From time to time I wanted to post my thoughts on certain topics, but was honestly too afraid. I was afraid of what the people who knew me would think about what I would write (obviously I never spoke my ideas aloud). So this blog remained a random picture blog with the occasional book review thrown in for about a year.

What changed things though was when I attended the Emerging Women ReGathering in April of 2006. One of the themes of that gathering was to explore how women (even in the Emerging Church) have often not been allowed (by others and ourselves) to have a voice. The weekend provided times of healing and encouragement to speak up in whatever was we can. I left having made a personal commitment to use my voice by putting my thoughts into writing – no matter how jumbled or incoherent they may at times be. I’m not saying that my writing is good or all that meaningful, just that it is a vehicle for my voice and a means to develop and refine my thoughts.

So this blog has been part of my journey of awakening and self-discovery the last couple of years. I have enjoyed crafting it and plan on continuing to express my thoughts through random reviews, reflections, and rants. Who knows where (if anywhere) this will lead, but for now I’m enjoying the journey.

Read more

Recommended Reading – Graven Ideologies

Posted on

Back when I was a student at Wheaton College before I had ever heard of this thing called the Emerging Church (back before Emergent even existed I think) I began to encounter the philosophical roots of postmodernism. I was intrigued and in an attempt to find out more about this way of discussing and perceiving truth and reality I signed up for a class called “Christianity and Postmodernism” taught by Bruce Benson. Needless to say I was in over my head as I struggled to comprehend new ideas and unfamiliar terms. I somehow managed to stumble through the class with a passing grade (and that includes the utterly nervewracking oral exams that I to this day have no clue what I actually talked about).

A few years later Benson published his lecture notes from that class as the book Graven Ideologies. (btw- I am so not one of the students listed from that class that he acknowledges as helping him refine his thoughts and all that…). Anyway, after recently reading Peter Rollin’s How (not) to Speak of God I knew that I had heard the idea of conceptual idolatry discussed before and remembered that class. So to make a long story short, I finally got around to reading Graven Ideologies. It’s amazing how much more sense it all made now that I’ve been a part of this emerging/postmodern discussion for a number of years.

But my point here is not to point out how stupid I was a few years ago (or now), but to highly recommend this book. For those of you who are fans of Rollins’ book and/or find yourself forced into endless discussions on the nature of truth Benson’s book is a must read. It is an accessible introduction to the main ideas and writers of postmodern philosophy that interprets their implications for Christian faith. It is all about sounding out idols in our conceptions of and language about God. As with Rollins’ book, it asks how we can ever manage to actually speak of God without falling into blasphemy, but goes a lot further in how it answers that question. I fully admit to feeling too lazy to write a detailed review of the book at the moment, so I’ll send anyone who is interested here. But this book is now high on my list of recommended must reads for anyone who wishes to think through postmodernism and its influence on the theological discussions of the emerging church.

Why read the philosophical background and discuss these ideas at all? Besides being fascinating and intellectually provoking, it has everything to do with how we practice our faith. I want to leave you with two quotes from Benson’s epilogue regarding that. Basically we explore these ideas and sound out the conceptual idols in our faith so that we can have a right relationship with God and participate in true worship.

p.226 – “…one recognizes that everything one ‘knows’ about God still falls short: we do not own the truth. While we point to the truth, we are not that truth, nor is it something we possess. At most, God provides glimpses of his truth. Yet to say that we have glimpses is to say that we indeed see. God has not left us blind. We have a glimpse of the Word made flesh. And as Jesus attests, “If you know me, you will know my Father also” (Jn 14:7). Scripture is clear that we can know God and his truth in a real sense. Yet we know him in the sense of a personal relationship, not in the sense of grasping his eidos. There is true sight, but it is not an exhaustive seeing.”

p.240 “… praise results precisely when the limits of predication regarding God are recognized. That recognition leads to a simultaneous revelation: we “see” both how limited we are and how unlimited God is. It is in this moment of revelation that true praise can take place. Note that, properly speaking, praise isn’t usually something that we can make happen. Instead praise is something that happens to us. And it doesn’t really happen very often. Why not? The answer is that we don’t really recognize our own limits most of the time. We may acknowledge them intellectually, but actually experiencing them – having them placed in front of our face -is rare. Thus true worship, in which we have a keen sense of God’s worth, takes place relatively infrequently.”

Read more

Why Care?

Posted on

On Sunday morning this past weekend at the Jubilee conference we got to “worship” with spoken word protest poetry (you can find some of it here). One line that really struck me was, “our arms are raised, but our fists are open.” We raise our hands in worship, a symbol of our close connection to God and the depth of our personal piety, and yet we don’t raise our fists in protest of the injustices in the world. We are too lazy, too wrapped up in church events, or too afraid to get involved. Our “worship” is all about us and not about others. I am reminded of the passages from Isaiah where we’re told the kind of worship God desires –

Isaiah 1:15-17

When you spread out your hands in prayer,
I will hide my eyes from you;
even if you offer many prayers,
I will not listen.
Your hands are full of blood;
wash and make yourselves clean.
Take your evil deeds
out of my sight!
Stop doing wrong,
learn to do right!
Seek justice,
encourage the oppressed.
Defend the cause of the fatherless,
plead the case of the widow.

Isaiah 58:6

This is the kind of fast day I’m after:
to break the chains of injustice,
get rid of exploitation in the workplace,
free the oppressed,
cancel debts.

So while I am encouraged that the Emerging Church is becoming more and more aware of these issues, universal action still seems a long way off. I still encounter people who debate whether not not we should attempt to right the wrongs of the world. Or those that tell us not to get bogged down on the big issues, just focus on your everyday life. Or those who say all we need to do is pray and not have anything to do with politics ever. My response is that we need to get up off our knees and put our prayers into action. But how do we motivate people? Why should people care?

In a session this weekend one presenter listed the reasons why people should care about Debt Relief. I find these interesting and wonder if there are any more that can be added to the list.

    1. It’s a moral issue and as people of faith/conscious we should care for others. We should be moved to effect change and love our neighbor. But if that isn’t enough to motivate us, there are a few other reasons –

 

    1. Health concerns. If indebted countries continue to slash funds to heath services so that they can repay debt, disease will flourish. There has already been a significant rise in easily treatable/preventable diseases as a direct result of the reduction in doctors, nurses, and clinics. But there is also the potential (and we are seeing the beginnings of it) for deadly diseases to proliferate which will effect the whole world. If other countries can’t handle epidemics of TB, Avian flu, and AIDS the whole world will pay.

 

    1. Environmental degradation. As countries that are forced to spend 80% of their budget on debt repayment scramble to find alternate sources of income, the environment is laid waste. Forests are clear cut, unsustainable crops are planted, pesticides are dumped into the environment, chemicals are dumped into rivers instead of disposed of properly. This destroys ecosystems and will result in a completely unlivable landscape down the road. Where will all the people go then or whose aid will they live on then?

 

  1. To get the politicians (the ones in the position to affect change – i.e. clean up the messes they have made) to care, it takes the voters letting them know that care care. If the politicians know that they will face consequences if they don’t listen to their constituency, then they will work for change in order to save their own butts come election time.

What could you add to the list? Is it bad to focus on the natural consequences that will effect us personally if the plight of the other isn’t enough to move us to action? I would love to hear your thoughts.

Read more

Interfaith Encounters

Posted on

So got to spend the better part of the day today in Chicago (the city as opposed to the general geographic area). I caught the train at the end of line at a station surrounded by cornfields and spent the next hour watching those cornfields change into small farms and horse corrals, then cookie-cutter suburbs, then nice rich suburbs, then older artsy suburbs, then poor ethic suburbs, then run-down factory zones, until I finally entered the land of skyscrapers and trendy loft apartments. It was a most interesting ride to watch the history of urban sprawl pass by my window.

I went downtown to participate in a ecumenical, inter-faith clergy discussion. It was an amazing group that had gathered at Wicker Park Lutheran Church for lunch and discussion. I think I was the only pseudo-evangelical. Others represented Lutherans, Presbyterians, Catholics, and Unitarians and from outside Christianity there were two Zen Buddhist Priests and an Emerging Jewish Rabbi. The “clergy cafe” is hosted by Reverend Clare Butterfield (Unitarian-Universalist) of Faith in Place, a Creation care ministry based in downtown Chicago. Mike attended the last gathering (read about it here) so I got to go this time.

The topic for discussion was family systems theory and its implications for leadership for people in modern congregations and modern times. We were given a book list to choose from that dealt with systems theory. I read Peter Steinke’s Healthy Congregations. Having not been to seminary (yet) where it seemed most people there had studied systems theory, I felt a bit lost at points in the discussion. We spent a lot of time discussing the central necessity of self-differentiation in systems theory. As Wikipedia explains –

Differentiation of self refers to one’s ability to separate one’s own intellectual and emotional functioning from that of the family. Bowen spoke of people functioning on a single continuum or scale. Individuals with “low differentiation” are more likely to become fused with predominant family emotions. (A related concept is that of an undifferentiated ego mass, which is a term used to describe a family unit whose members possess low differentiation and therefore are emotionally fused.) Those with “low differentiation” depend on others approval and acceptance. They either conform themselves to others in order to please them, or they attempt to force others to conform to themselves. They are thus more vulnerable to stress and they struggle more to adjust to life changes. (534 Bowen 1974) To have a well-differentiated “self” is an ideal that no one realizes perfectly. They recognize that they need others, but they depend less on other’s acceptance and approval. They do not merely adopt the attitude of those around them but acquire their principles thoughtfully. These help them decide important family and social issues, and resist the feelings of the moment. Thus, despite conflict, criticism, and rejection they can stay calm and clear headed enough to distinguish thinking rooted in a careful assessment of the facts from thinking clouded by emotion. What they decide and say matches what they do. When they act in the best interests of the group, they choose thoughtfully, not because they are caving in to relationship pressures. Confident in their own thinking, they can either support another’s view without becoming wishy-washy or reject another’s view without becoming hostile.

The lack of self-differentiation can result in conflict and the most unhealthy way to address conflict is to cut oneself off from it. “The opposite of an emotional cut-off is an open relationship. It is a very effective way to reduce a group’s over-all anxiety. Continued low anxiety permits motivated family members to begin the slow steps to better differentiation.”

It is all a very fascinating topic, but as with most traditionally modern expressions of faith, I felt the Emerging Church just didn’t fit. In Systems Theory (according to my very limited understanding thereof) stronger leaders and more distinct individuals are necessary for a group/church to be healthy. This seems to fly in the face of organic, missional approaches to church where hierarchy is replaced with community. Also those from the mainline perspectives couldn’t understand that for some in the emerging church, leaving a church (cutting-off) may be the only healthy option. They couldn’t fathom that there could be churches where questions weren’t welcome and intellectual honesty was suppressed for the sake of tradition and doctrine (or where ecumenical/interfaith gatherings weren’t the norm, much less approved of). So to assume that to leave a church is always unhealthy isn’t something I can concede. It may not always be painless, but sometimes it is the only possible way to stay alive for many people involved in the emerging church (and is often a decision that is made for them anyway). But the conversation was a good reminder that my post-evangelical emerging experience is hardly a common story or issue outside of the bubble I exist in (not that that makes it any less valid, just different).

It was a fun day and I’m still processing our discussion. I hope I can take the opportunity to gather again with this group in the future.

Read more

Watch Your Mouth? Offensive Language and Christianity

Posted on

Andrew Jones has an interesting post up about offensive language. He writes about recent offense that has been taken by the usage of certain words and then delves into the history of what offends. He proposes that in premodern times people were offended by words that were “excommunicatory in nature – offensive words were religious terms that threatened punishment and damnation.” In modern times it was “words that cause most offense affront our personal and private sensibilities. These offensive words are normally associated with private body parts, bodily functions of a toilet nature, and sexual relations.” In our postmodern times “it is exclusionary language that causes most offence. Marginalizing people due to their race, gender, disability or status is about the most offensive thing you can say.” He then mentions the bible passages that refer to offensive language including “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.” Eph 4:29.

Call me a stereotypical postmodern, but I understand the pre- and postmodern views on offensive language, but just can’t justify the modern. Biblically if the point is not to use the Lord’s name in vain (which referred to making flippant curses or oaths) or not to tear anyone down, the modern sensibility just doesn’t fit. In fact the modern approach does just the opposite – instead of building people up, modern bans of “offensive language” exist to exclude and ridicule. Most of the language that is offensive under the modern sensibilities (bodily and sexual references) is called vulgar. While we have come to perceive of “vulgar” as anything bad, dirty, and lower, it was originally just a term of derision used for the lower classes. So anything associated with the poor, uneducated masses (including their language) was considered vulgar and inappropriate for civilized folk.

So usage of terms that implied that one didn’t subscribe to classism, racism and the like became taboo. Proper people don’t use the germanic/anglo language of the poor (shit, fuck) they use the latinate language of the rich and powerful (excrement, fornicate). Over time the taboo took on mythic dimensions. Certain words came to hold almost magical powers. Say a certain word (incant this spell) and you have sinned (cursed yourself to hell). I doubt that most Christians actually stop to think about what sort of theology they are promoting when they insist that just saying “fuck” is a sin.

The fact that for most Christians it’s okay to use language of hate and derision (making fun of homosexuals, women, and other religions), but its sinful to say certain “vulgar” words displays a seriously messed up theology in my opinion. We are told to build others up with our language and encouraging language of hate while forbidding the language of the poor achieves the exact opposite. So label me as just being postmodern, but I see the more constructive (and biblical) option to be to avoid language that excludes, tears down, and ridicules. So I really don’t care if someone drops the “f-bomb” but I won’t abide “you throw like a girl.”

So it has nothing to do with wanting to be hip and cool or selling out to the culture if I choose to use a word that for a certain period of English history was considered taboo. It has more to do with actually considering my theology of sin, understanding the call to love my neighbor, and living accordingly. But that just pushes the walls of the box a little too far for most people…

Read more

Summer Conferences

Posted on

Here are the spiffy cool conferences I’ll be attending this summer. You know you wanna come too…

 

Jubilee USA Grassroots Conference here in Chicago. “The conference will include speakers from the Global South, skill-building sessions for grassroots economic justice activists (advocacy, media work, engaging congregations, etc.), and workshops that will deepen participants’ understanding of debt and economic justice issues. And of course there will also be down time for networking and having fun with global economic justice activists from around the United States.”

Because I’m all about having fun with global economic justice activists, no really, I am… It sounds like a great conference and a good way to learn more about involvement and advocacy.

and then there’s the –



 

“A church of 10,000 people that meets in a mall…
A small urban community that meets in an art gallery…
An African-American church on the south-side of Chicago…
Web communities that connect tens of thousands of people…

What do all of these have in common? They are all emerging faith communities discovering what it means to be missional in their own unique context. AND they will all be represented at the first annual Midwest Emergent Gathering, July 20-21 in the suburbs of Chicago, IL. Come learn from Tony Jones (Emergent Village), Denise Van Eck (Mars Hill Bible Church), Spencer Burke (theOoze.com), Nanette Sawyer (Wicker Park Grace), Doug Pagitt (Solomon’s Porch), and Alise Barrymore & James King (The Emmaus Community) and other missional practitioners from a wide diversity of backgrounds as we learn together about “Creating Missional Communities”.

Contribute to the conversation as we discuss, network, and learn in community together via fast-paced mainstage sessions, interactive workshops, and unstructured times for dialogue with old or new friends. Whether mainline or evangelical, emerging or traditional, high church or de-churched, you will find inspiration and ideas to help you and your faith community become more effective agents for the mission of God in this hurting world.”

Doesn’t it sound great. (okay, so yes I’m part of the planning team and need to promote it, but I still think it sounds great and am looking forward to attending!). I will be hosting an Emerging Women affinity lunch during it which anyone is welcome to attend.

If anyone is planning on attending these events let me know so we can hang out.

Read more

The Influencers

Posted on

From Mark at The Jesus Manifesto –

“I’m interested in your perceptions of influence in contrast to those who have actually influence you. Here’s how my little experiment will work. After each of the categories below, add people to the lists. If someone has already “taken your answer” put an “x” behind their name. Make sense? I’m assuming that some folks will add names to the list, but many others will agree…some folks will have lots of x-es after their names.

Once you’ve added to the list and posted on your site, please leave a comment here. I’ll try to keep the list updated. Oh, and please don’t list yourself or your own blog or your own community.”

Who do you think are the two most influential Christian spiritual leaders today (in North America)?

    1. Rick Warren xx
    2. Joel Osteen
    3. T.D. Jakes
    4. Joyce Meyers x
    5. Jim Wallis x

Who do you think are the two most influential emerging Christian spiritual leaders today (in North America)?

    1. Brian McLaren x
    2. Rob Bell xx
    3. Todd Hunter
    4. Tony Jones

Which two Christian spiritual leaders (in North America) do you think are most worthy of being influential?

    1. Eugene Peterson x
    2. Ched Myers
    3. Rich Nathan
    4. Diana Butler Bass
    5. Jim Wallis xx
    6. Brian McLaren x

Which two churchy or theological blogs do you think are the most influential?

    1. The Jesus Creed xx
    2. Real Live Preacher x
    3. Tall Skinny Kiwix
    4. Jollyblogger

Which two churchy or theological blogs have influenced you the most?

    1. Reclaiming the Mission
    2. Leaving Munster x
    3. Internet Monk x
    4. The Kinglings Muse
    5. Jesus Creedx
    6. Dylan’s Lectionary Blogx

Which two North American church communities do you believe are the most influential?

    1. Willow Creek xx
    2. Saddleback xx
    3. Lifechurch.tv
    4. Vineyard Columbus, Ohio

Which two self-described emerging/missional (North American) communities do you believe are the most influential?

    1. Solomon’s Porch xx
    2. Mars Hill (take your pick) xx
    3. Imagio Dei, Portland

c
Which two North American church communities do you think are most worthy of being influential?

  1. Church of the Savior (Washington, D.C.)
  2. A Catholic Worker house…take your pick
  3. Oscar Romero Catholic Worker, Oklahoma City
  4. Koinonia, Georgia
  5. Apostles Church, Seattle WA
  6. Vintage Faith
  7. St. Sabina (Chicago, IL) x
  8. Mars Hill, MI x
Read more

Emerging Church Blogroll

Posted on

A spiffy cool new resource/bloglist thing is in the works over at Subversive Influence. The point is to increase the traffic and awareness on Emerging Church blogs. Sounds great to me – keeping up with the conversation is fun. Some on the list I already know and love, others I look forward to exploring.

Here’s what to do. Think of between 3 and 5 blogs which you think are under-rated, under-appreciated, or under-valued. More people should be reading them, in other words. They need to be blogging largely on EMC themes and topics, and they should not be on the list of leading blogs on these areas, say 150ish+ links on Technorati.

To participate, copy this list into a new post on your own blog, and add the names you have to the bottom of the list, and encourage others to do the same. The list could get fairly long, but that’s part of the point — each link will help boost the undervalued blog’s profile… and you might even get some link love from it too! Include these instructions (this and the preceding paragraph). When you’ve done that, leave a trackback or comment below, or link to this post so we can keep track of who ends up participating. Okay, here we go, in no particular order:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    • and my additions –

 

 

 

 

  • Who’s Next?
Read more

Emerging Women at the Gathering

Posted on

Since I attended the Emergent Gathering on the heels of the Emerging Women gathering, and since I was giving “presentations” on Emerging Women and feminine imagery for God, naturally my experience at the Gathering was flavored by gender issues. Not that gender equality was a hugely debated issue in that group – which was refreshing – it was just always on my radar. Two things that stood out: the response to “emerging women”, and the actions of many of the women there.

In leading a discussion on Emerging Women, some of the women there protested its necessity. There was an assumption that equality exists already, and that we are actually hurting that equality to separate ourselves as women. Another sentiment expressed was that, since the power structures of the church are wrong/broken in the first place, we as women should be working to change those and not to join them. There is a part of me that agrees with each of those sentiments. There is danger in having “separate but equal” sorts of gatherings/books/discussions. And I do agree that the male driven power structures in the church are wrong and broken. But I still think there is a need for Emerging Women.

When women feel like we don’t have a voice in a community, then equality isn’t fully realized. We can be a lone voice who seeks power and is labeled a bitch for trying to do what the guys are already doing, or we can join one another as a collective voice seeking justice together. We can encourage each other and find a wider audience as a networked group. Having a voice isn’t a power play. It is a call for respect and an opportunity to share perspectives that are being ignored. And, amazingly enough, there are still women who think they are not allowed to have a voice or be used by God. If they can join a conversation where they feel comfortable among other women who can encourage them in the process of self-discovery, then that conversation (separate though it may be) is necessary.

The whole power issue gets me. I usually see the obsession with power as a very male thing. I want respect and encouragement, but I care very little for power. I have no desire to “be over” large numbers of people, but I still want to teach. I want to share what is inside me – what God is putting on my heart. I want to do that in a community of others who are all serving, teaching, and leading each other. If that is a female approach to leadership then I see it as being a healing antidote to broken power structures. But if we do not advocate for women to be given opportunities within the system as it currently exists, then how can we ever expect it to change?

All that said, I still saw a huge disparity between the men and women at the Gathering. None of the main leaders or big names (and a good number of the men in general) had come with their wives. Why not? Are their wives not part of this conversation? I understand the need to leave one half of the couple home with the kids (that’s what I did) – but I met only one other woman whose husband had stayed home while there were scores of men who had left wives at home (with or without kids). And of the women who were there, most spent their time chasing the kids around on the edges of discussion and not fully participating in them. When some of us asked them if they were involved in the emerging conversation, most said no, because they weren’t readers. That scared me. There are so few women involved in this to begin with and the ones who do show up don’t feel like they can really be a part of the conversation as it is presented now.

I have to wonder, if it is only the males leading this conversation, will it have anything to offer women at all? Also, if there are all these men discovering a new way of being a Christian while their wives aren’t engaged in the conversation – what does that do to their marriages? How can they talk about faith or worship together? Does the man even attempt to converse with his wife about these things or does she just reject ideas as “too intellectual?” I don’t get it. There is so much opportunity here and there are still these huge issues developing that aren’t being addressed. Something needs to change and it will have to be addressed proactively in order for anything to happen at all.

Just some reflections for the moment. I’m going to need to think more about this issue.

Read more