Appropriation of broader culture seems to be the continued driving force for church programs. Perhaps the fragmentation of my Protestant tradition has led to the jettisoning of our own culture, distinct, full of grace and peace.
I still can't get past the "classroom" feel in my church where I "teach"; and we supposedly left Sunday school behind in favor of "Connect Groups". Still, the culture of the attendees is to expect a market-style exchange where their attendance (and giving) is cherished by the leaders, and they are bequeathed knowledge in return. C-P, indeed.
I love the metaphor of a campfire. I can sit and gaze into a fire for hours. God is the fire and God does what he does best… being the beautiful God who doesn’t want to be God without us.
I'm not sure I agree with the statement that "there was no spiritual formation in the time of Israel or Christ." Wasn't the sacrificial system an important kind of spiritual formation where the people would (ideally) be constantly reminded of the weight and consequences of the sin and the love and mercy of God in allowing the guilt of the individual to be transferred and subsumed? Isn't the concept of the Year of Jubilee a practice of spiritual formation?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your meaning in your statement, but my understanding was that a very important function of the Mosaic law was the formation of the hearts of the Israelites toward right relationship with God.
Maybe a third post on 'spiritual formation' as Jesus engaged in it? (That is, if we want to use that term rather than 'discipleship'). Jesus pursued friendships and achieved it, as a model for us to follow, might be a different phrasing to describe what He did with the twelve, for 3 years, too. Maybe a fourth post on how others followed Jesus in this regard, as well, particularly Paul, whose model is most fully described (after Jesus, of course).
Yeah, I questioned that as well. There may not have been Sunday school or “small groups” as we think of it in 21st c. America, but there was clearly a system of religious practice: the sacrifices, the liturgy in the temple and synagogues, the schedule of what we might now call “daily prayer offices,” memorization of the Torah, etc - all of which I feel like are, very “spiritually formative”.
I wonder if she’s saying that these things were not intended as a Program Of Spiritual Formation, but rather just “what the people of God do”?
19 hrs ago·edited 19 hrs agoLiked by Kirsten Sanders
"I wonder if she’s saying that these things were not intended as a Program Of Spiritual Formation, but rather just “what the people of God do”?" ---> Yes. I have been wondering about this, as well. What was once a given, a way of living, is often seen as pulling teeth or this huge uphill battle for people to pull off individually.
(Just finished going through a book on the Reformation and its aftermath, and while I'm certainly not advocating bringing back an oppressive Christendom, the parts about the shared, collective understanding of what the practice of Christianity meant had me thinking about why it is so hard for us to have that. The author would say the Reformation caused the continuing fractures of faith practice, but I'm not entirely sure that's a satisfying explanation. Just a connection I had.)
This post reminds me of the functional atheism many people have when it comes to church. Sure, we believe God will show up and be present and transform us......but in just in case we need these programs for evidence that God is at work. It is common lament of some pastors that they only get the people for an hour, but fox news gets them 7 days a week, not believing that an hour with God could more formative than other sources.
To believe we are gathered around a holy and formative fire seems to be the first step in our recovery today. I often joke at our church here that our slogan is simple, 'church, we believe it works.'
I love the first paragraph, and the next several that continue this point. The most impactful academics I know, who spent time 'seeing the whole'; are the ones who can then explain paradigms simply enough for anyone to understand. What you describe is a better way to think about the whole of the Old Testament, than any I've come across before. And what you describe can be extended into the New Testament revelation, too, without much effort, it seems. You have a real ability to take theology to a level that helps in daily life, in a simple way that actually WORKS. What a gift to see it this way. Thank you!
I love this because it is an honest-to-God act of faith. I hate this because it takes an act of faith.
I live in a place where people don’t know God, and the weirdos here who do know him honestly seek to demonstrate the goodness of God to those who haven’t experienced him (in a time when the very idea of ‘goodness’ has radically shifted). So our goal is to try and introduce this good God to our neighbors, but they seem to have no need for him (or us for that matter). We’ve built a world in which we don’t need God, and so we continue gathering around this unneeded God, and we’re perfectly happy to do so. But I am concerned that our campfire is going to sputter out at some point.
I think the primary issue here is that Jesus did not commission his church simply to "light the candles and pray" but to "make disciples of all nations, teaching them to obey (and baptizing!)". I generally think less programtic approaches to local church ministry are helpful, because the people need to see themselves as a people gathered and scattered - they are the work of ministry! And when we gather it is not to fill our heads or our emotions, but to meet with the living God. But where is the role of catechisis? Where is the place "teaching to obey"? This right impulse shouldn't be abandoned just because many churches feel bloated and have lost their liturgical identity.
this is why the linguistic model is so helpful. people will need to learn the language once they are in; but there has to be something to invite them in to. Additionally, I think its interesting that you assume that "making disciples" and "gathering around" can't be the same thing.
They absolutely can be the same thing, no doubt. What better place for discipleship than with his people at his table! But there still is a "go" element here that we can't miss. I am 100% with you on inviting people to the place where we meet with God, not just "hear a talk" or "feel a feeling." Just thinking through the lens of discipleship... It's not less than gathering around. But could it be something more?
Appropriation of broader culture seems to be the continued driving force for church programs. Perhaps the fragmentation of my Protestant tradition has led to the jettisoning of our own culture, distinct, full of grace and peace.
I still can't get past the "classroom" feel in my church where I "teach"; and we supposedly left Sunday school behind in favor of "Connect Groups". Still, the culture of the attendees is to expect a market-style exchange where their attendance (and giving) is cherished by the leaders, and they are bequeathed knowledge in return. C-P, indeed.
I love the metaphor of a campfire. I can sit and gaze into a fire for hours. God is the fire and God does what he does best… being the beautiful God who doesn’t want to be God without us.
I'm not sure I agree with the statement that "there was no spiritual formation in the time of Israel or Christ." Wasn't the sacrificial system an important kind of spiritual formation where the people would (ideally) be constantly reminded of the weight and consequences of the sin and the love and mercy of God in allowing the guilt of the individual to be transferred and subsumed? Isn't the concept of the Year of Jubilee a practice of spiritual formation?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your meaning in your statement, but my understanding was that a very important function of the Mosaic law was the formation of the hearts of the Israelites toward right relationship with God.
This is important enough to address in a second post, I think!
Maybe a third post on 'spiritual formation' as Jesus engaged in it? (That is, if we want to use that term rather than 'discipleship'). Jesus pursued friendships and achieved it, as a model for us to follow, might be a different phrasing to describe what He did with the twelve, for 3 years, too. Maybe a fourth post on how others followed Jesus in this regard, as well, particularly Paul, whose model is most fully described (after Jesus, of course).
Yeah, I questioned that as well. There may not have been Sunday school or “small groups” as we think of it in 21st c. America, but there was clearly a system of religious practice: the sacrifices, the liturgy in the temple and synagogues, the schedule of what we might now call “daily prayer offices,” memorization of the Torah, etc - all of which I feel like are, very “spiritually formative”.
I wonder if she’s saying that these things were not intended as a Program Of Spiritual Formation, but rather just “what the people of God do”?
"I wonder if she’s saying that these things were not intended as a Program Of Spiritual Formation, but rather just “what the people of God do”?" ---> Yes. I have been wondering about this, as well. What was once a given, a way of living, is often seen as pulling teeth or this huge uphill battle for people to pull off individually.
(Just finished going through a book on the Reformation and its aftermath, and while I'm certainly not advocating bringing back an oppressive Christendom, the parts about the shared, collective understanding of what the practice of Christianity meant had me thinking about why it is so hard for us to have that. The author would say the Reformation caused the continuing fractures of faith practice, but I'm not entirely sure that's a satisfying explanation. Just a connection I had.)
if you are reading brad gregory he blames all social ills and some material ones on the Reformation ;-)
That seems to be his recurring thesis, I found haha
its propaganda.
This post reminds me of the functional atheism many people have when it comes to church. Sure, we believe God will show up and be present and transform us......but in just in case we need these programs for evidence that God is at work. It is common lament of some pastors that they only get the people for an hour, but fox news gets them 7 days a week, not believing that an hour with God could more formative than other sources.
To believe we are gathered around a holy and formative fire seems to be the first step in our recovery today. I often joke at our church here that our slogan is simple, 'church, we believe it works.'
I love the first paragraph, and the next several that continue this point. The most impactful academics I know, who spent time 'seeing the whole'; are the ones who can then explain paradigms simply enough for anyone to understand. What you describe is a better way to think about the whole of the Old Testament, than any I've come across before. And what you describe can be extended into the New Testament revelation, too, without much effort, it seems. You have a real ability to take theology to a level that helps in daily life, in a simple way that actually WORKS. What a gift to see it this way. Thank you!
I love this because it is an honest-to-God act of faith. I hate this because it takes an act of faith.
I live in a place where people don’t know God, and the weirdos here who do know him honestly seek to demonstrate the goodness of God to those who haven’t experienced him (in a time when the very idea of ‘goodness’ has radically shifted). So our goal is to try and introduce this good God to our neighbors, but they seem to have no need for him (or us for that matter). We’ve built a world in which we don’t need God, and so we continue gathering around this unneeded God, and we’re perfectly happy to do so. But I am concerned that our campfire is going to sputter out at some point.
I think the primary issue here is that Jesus did not commission his church simply to "light the candles and pray" but to "make disciples of all nations, teaching them to obey (and baptizing!)". I generally think less programtic approaches to local church ministry are helpful, because the people need to see themselves as a people gathered and scattered - they are the work of ministry! And when we gather it is not to fill our heads or our emotions, but to meet with the living God. But where is the role of catechisis? Where is the place "teaching to obey"? This right impulse shouldn't be abandoned just because many churches feel bloated and have lost their liturgical identity.
this is why the linguistic model is so helpful. people will need to learn the language once they are in; but there has to be something to invite them in to. Additionally, I think its interesting that you assume that "making disciples" and "gathering around" can't be the same thing.
They absolutely can be the same thing, no doubt. What better place for discipleship than with his people at his table! But there still is a "go" element here that we can't miss. I am 100% with you on inviting people to the place where we meet with God, not just "hear a talk" or "feel a feeling." Just thinking through the lens of discipleship... It's not less than gathering around. But could it be something more?
And what is the New Covenant identity of the church, if not (in some way) militant?
So much to think about! In the evangelical church we attend it is all about the right or wrong Scripture interpretations. And politics. And politics.
My heart longs to be with God.