Last weekend our family went to Philip Island for the Wesleyan Methodist Church Southern District Conference. This is the annual gathering of Wesleyans in the Southern states. We had the usual business sessions to hear reports and elect boards, committees and directors for the following year but it is also a family camp that included children’s and youth activities. The guest speaker this year was John Smith (of God’s Squad fame). John gave two messages that challenged and provoked in his inimitable prophetic style. His general topic for the weekend was “Real Holiness” – living the way God intended us to live. He talked about our call to personal and social holiness. He began one message with an illustration of a tree that got chopped down in his backyard and he and his wife argued about how old it was. John decided to count the rings on the tree to determine its age – and he won the argument! He then made the point that the tree is always sustained by the outer ring of bark and that if that outer ring is damaged (ringbarked) the tree will die. This is true for the church, if the current church dies the whole church dies. He also identified that the inner rings support the tree and that the tree would not actually be a tree without it’s history . He encouraged the emerging church movement to consider the support that the church of history has provided for it. I agree with him in criticising those who don’t see anything good in the church of the past 50, 100 or 1000 years. We have to learn from and appreciate our heritage. I’m mindful of this as we (Mimos) seek to be an authentic church for our time and culture. We have to reject those things that do not help us be a real expression of corporate faith while at the same time embracing those practices that have stood the test of time for the church.
4 comments:
I agree that we need to rely on the historical church for lessons learned, and that so many emerging and missional writers fail to do so. However, I also think that so many of the historical churches (most notably the established churches of today) have failed to properly support the emerging ideas of postmodern Christians, choosing instead to call them heretics and kick them and their "divisive" ideas out of their churches. The postmoderns then wipe off the dust and go somewhere that they WILL be listened to.
You have to wonder why it is that the established church tends to kick people out and then wonder why it's shrinking. Many whine and complain that nobody comes to church anymore, that it's a generation of heathens and pagans, and yet it's all talk ... do they ever go DO anything about it?
Nah, not usually.
John Smith was great - a real highlight of the Conference. On Chris' comments. I certainly haven't seen any emergent people kicked out of Wesleyan churches. I think it's a bit strong to say that traditional churches mostly do nothing about reaching the unchurched. I find traditional churches have often been quite flexible not only in allowing but positively encouraging experimentation in church life. Mimos (a Wesleyan Methodist congregation) is a good example, Cession in Auckland NZ another one. On the other hand some emergent church folks are positively rude to traditionalists because they don't see the need to chuck everything they value out the window. Hey we're all Christians trying to get the job done so let's encourage one another despite our diversity.
Glen,
I think the emerging and missional church's frustrations often lie in the established church ignoring them and the fundamentalist conservative churches actively ousting them. In my experience at a wesleyan church, the "investigation" into postmodernism initiated by the pastor was effectively ignored by the church staff. When the team (myself included) recommended that the "band-aid" quick-fix options the staff proposed back to us were going to fail, they pushed us aside as idealists and did nothing. I've heard many other stories along these same lines, and read many fundamentalist reports about the missional church that are highly negative and rather hostile.
I agree, we're all Christians who care greatly for the mission of Jesus. I also agree that until hostility ceases amongst those followers of Jesus, the church is limping on a crutch. In my experience, the hostility lies on both sides ... but there are people on the missional side attempting to initiate dialogue. I strongly believe that the missional church has much to add to the established church, adding pioneering and prophetic elements back where they've long since disappeared. Being ignored doesn't help that discussion, it kills it.
Post a Comment