I’ve just finished Brian MacLaren’s book – “A New Kind of Christian” last week. I’ve been listening to it on audio CD on account of not seeming to have any time to sit down and read – see item on 13 July (running on empty).
Its pretty good. If I had read it five years ago, I’d probably be saying that it was amazing. Its just that I have read many books saying similar things.
I have just had this “thing” buzzing round my head since I finished it, especially in the llight of reading “The Irresistible Revolution”. I have been thinking about how much time iis spent nowadays discussing how we “do” church (whether in the light of post-modernity, or post-Christendom or whatever)
I just cannot help thinking that God is not that interested in how we do church. I think that he is completely obsessed with what church is actually for! I wonder whether if we focussed on what we are actually here for – Matt 28 – making disicples; Luke 4:18,19 – releasing the oppressed etc, then “church” will shape itself.
I think that I don’t like the term “doing” church very much. I prefer being church. So, how we are church should be the inevitable result of “the Spirit of the Sovereign Lord” being on us and us being ambassadors of Christ. I guess that this is the same as what Steve Chalke says in “Intelligent church” – our understanding of Christ shaping our mission, which in turn shapes our church (and not the other way round, as in most cases).
What am I babbling on about? Well, I have just been thinking about people like the Church of the Saviour, Shane Claiborne, Mother Teresa, Pastor Sam (our friend in Tamil Nadu), India, Kathy and Keith (our friends in Zimbabwe) and Paul of Tarsus, and, while we’re on it, Jesus!
How do/did any of these people do church? I have no idea! Who cares? We know almost nothing about how Jesus did meetings. We have one record of him singing a hymn. Paul gives us some clues on doing meetings, but it is mainly about being considerate and letting everyone contribute (1 Cor 12-14).
The thing is that church is meant to be body of Christ in action. Its like we have got so focussed on body building that this has become our goal. I spend a lot of the winter trying to do some weights and stay fit (ish) so that I can waterski better. The training is for a purpose and not for its own sake.
Maybe, we should build the body for a purpose? If we lose sight of the purpose then what are we doing? I wonder whether the problem starts when we are only building the body for vanity’s sake!
Surely, God will judge us by who we were in Christ and this, according to James, will be shown by what we did in the name of Christ. Not how we met or structured things in the name of Christ.
I look at some of the great people throughout history who just got on with it. They are the ones we need to listen to. It is an interesting observation how many of them historically and currently are catholics. How funny that the oldest, least post-modern, post-Christendom denomination seems to include the most radical saints (obviously this is not true of all catholics and also it is not true that all non-catholics are not radical). They just get on with it.
I have found Shane Claiborne’s book hard to read because it is not just interesting theory – he’s living it. It makes me uncomfortable. I think that I need to spend less time having interesting intellectual conversations and be made even more uncomfortable.
Nice.
I’ll look forward to that then.
0 Comments