Jonny Baker in Ireland
Over the last couple of days in Dublin I have had the chance to spend some time with Jonny Baker, world famous emerging church guru, who works for CMS England. He was over to do some work for David Brown, Church of Ireland Youth Officer (Anglican) with ordinands, and then running a training day for youth leaders. WE spent about 2 hours talking over dinner on Thursday night, and then I went to the training day yesterday, followed by a pint or two afterwards (as you do!)
We share a lot of common concerns really. His observation is that much of worship today is situated in two extremes, dead boring dry liturgical tradition, which is inaccessible to so many, and the Hillsong 40 minute worship is singing tradition with the preachy bit which is great to start with but over time for many is just too “thin” and unhelpful. Like me, only he is doing a lot more work on this than I am, he is seeking to find ways to allow the liturgical tradition to reconnect with the emerging post modern culture, and allows people to both be sandpapered over time by that tradition, and allows them to reframe their ordinary experiences to see the incarnate God in those experiences and to hear the call to live their lives in light of that (that wee spiel is from me, not Jonny). I think this is what Simon and I have been talking around, with all the assumptions that have come out in that. To be honest, I just don’t think either of the extremes described above offer us much in the long term. (Sorry Simon) Research done by people like Kevin Ward and Alan Jamieson debunk the whole Pentecostal, charismatic “we are so good at converting and disciplining people” Over 98% of the converts come from a church background, and the back door is huge. We need another way. That is what I am searching for, and what Jonny and lots of others are doing. Working at find other ways.
In our conversations, the concept of being sandpapered came up. I want to hang on to that. I realise that over the years the liturgy has sandpapered me. In part it has been the scripture imbedded in the liturgy. In part it has been the world view and theology that lies behind the words used and how they are arranged. God has been and continues to use it to reveal the person he desires me to be, like a sculptor.
I was disappointed last Sunday night when I went to a Belfast group called Ikon. They meet monthly in a bar, and engage people in the interface between their questions and scripture and the Christian tradition. It is not really a church, but is coming something. Actually, I have no idea what they do cos the owner didn’t turn up and open the place, so it didn’t happen. But I have bought their new CD which is great, ambient stuff. Check it out on Proost. But it was interesting talking to one of the “founders’ about what they are trying to do, and how. They have developed the jam donut theology around leadership, to describe church, leadership being the jam in the middle. They are a gravy ring, with no leadership. But they are wanting to work on developing the links and sense of community amongst their group of regulars, to become more splat like if you like (my image) interesting concept really.
Then yesterday I had the opposite to that conversation. At the training day we had a number of AOG young people and leaders there. I was really intrigued and unnerved by their passionate adherence to the need for defined leaders to tell us what to think and do, and to the need for preaching so that we get good biblical teaching, so that we know what the bible is really saying. What intrigues me about that is that a really important part of the English reformation was that preachers were not to be trusted that much, and that large pieces of scripture were to be read in church so that the people could measure what the preacher was saying against scripture. And now we have this group of people giving up the responsibility because the preacher knows best. Yeah right!! It is interesting how we read scripture (preaching is biblical - that was a new one on me) and so we need to be preached at, rather than read that the apostles and teachers used the best teaching methods of their day, and used those, and so should we. We use scripture to avoid change and make ourselves so inaccessible to the culture of our day that the gospel gets lost in a whole lot so mumbo jumbo.
Ah well, that is enough of a rant. I obviously need coffee.
We share a lot of common concerns really. His observation is that much of worship today is situated in two extremes, dead boring dry liturgical tradition, which is inaccessible to so many, and the Hillsong 40 minute worship is singing tradition with the preachy bit which is great to start with but over time for many is just too “thin” and unhelpful. Like me, only he is doing a lot more work on this than I am, he is seeking to find ways to allow the liturgical tradition to reconnect with the emerging post modern culture, and allows people to both be sandpapered over time by that tradition, and allows them to reframe their ordinary experiences to see the incarnate God in those experiences and to hear the call to live their lives in light of that (that wee spiel is from me, not Jonny). I think this is what Simon and I have been talking around, with all the assumptions that have come out in that. To be honest, I just don’t think either of the extremes described above offer us much in the long term. (Sorry Simon) Research done by people like Kevin Ward and Alan Jamieson debunk the whole Pentecostal, charismatic “we are so good at converting and disciplining people” Over 98% of the converts come from a church background, and the back door is huge. We need another way. That is what I am searching for, and what Jonny and lots of others are doing. Working at find other ways.
In our conversations, the concept of being sandpapered came up. I want to hang on to that. I realise that over the years the liturgy has sandpapered me. In part it has been the scripture imbedded in the liturgy. In part it has been the world view and theology that lies behind the words used and how they are arranged. God has been and continues to use it to reveal the person he desires me to be, like a sculptor.
I was disappointed last Sunday night when I went to a Belfast group called Ikon. They meet monthly in a bar, and engage people in the interface between their questions and scripture and the Christian tradition. It is not really a church, but is coming something. Actually, I have no idea what they do cos the owner didn’t turn up and open the place, so it didn’t happen. But I have bought their new CD which is great, ambient stuff. Check it out on Proost. But it was interesting talking to one of the “founders’ about what they are trying to do, and how. They have developed the jam donut theology around leadership, to describe church, leadership being the jam in the middle. They are a gravy ring, with no leadership. But they are wanting to work on developing the links and sense of community amongst their group of regulars, to become more splat like if you like (my image) interesting concept really.
Then yesterday I had the opposite to that conversation. At the training day we had a number of AOG young people and leaders there. I was really intrigued and unnerved by their passionate adherence to the need for defined leaders to tell us what to think and do, and to the need for preaching so that we get good biblical teaching, so that we know what the bible is really saying. What intrigues me about that is that a really important part of the English reformation was that preachers were not to be trusted that much, and that large pieces of scripture were to be read in church so that the people could measure what the preacher was saying against scripture. And now we have this group of people giving up the responsibility because the preacher knows best. Yeah right!! It is interesting how we read scripture (preaching is biblical - that was a new one on me) and so we need to be preached at, rather than read that the apostles and teachers used the best teaching methods of their day, and used those, and so should we. We use scripture to avoid change and make ourselves so inaccessible to the culture of our day that the gospel gets lost in a whole lot so mumbo jumbo.
Ah well, that is enough of a rant. I obviously need coffee.
Comments
http://prodigal.typeapd.com
Right, that's better...
You said:
"To be honest, I just don’t think either of the extremes described above offer us much in the long term. (Sorry Simon)"
Don't be. I think you have fundamentally misunderstood my position on this.
I am no particular fan of Pentecostalism. In fact, it leaves me cold, because it emphasises the shallow at the expense of the "weighty" bits of faith, and it rewards those who don't want to think too hard about anything. It sets in place authority structures that are, at best, neutral and at worst, completely corrupt. Some of the teaching is simplistic or manipulative, particularly when it comes to money.
There are some things I like. I like a lot of the music, and I enjoy the freedom of worship (but not the excesses this frequently produces). I enjoy listening to insightful teachers who possess serious wisdom, and who would be the first to tell you that their words should be checked against scripture to ensure accuracy.
However, the Pentecostal church has huge blind spots and a tendency to be somewhat self-deluded when it comes to key issues such as discipleship and what constitutes "biblical truth" (don't get me started on that one - I just went nine rounds with one of those Scripture Preservation people. Talk about straining at gnats and swallowing camels).
The problem for me is that the established, denominational churches aren't a lot better. Although I have been attending an Anglican church, I find it difficult to enbrace a church whose leader is also a Druid, and which has a rather liberal stance on many issues. I completely fail to see the need for "clergy" to wear any special form of garment in church. I can't see the point of using liturgy that generally promotes a mindless repetition on the part of most of the congregation. I have no time for the endless committees and church structure that tend to stifle life, rather than promoting it. And don't get me going on the ridiculous amounts of money spent on building and maintaining edifices, that would be better spent on mission activities.
There are good bits too... some of that liturgy I just criticised is rather good at getting us to remember key bits of scripture. Churches can be great places for quiet contemplation (but then, so can the beach).
I think most young people agree with my views on the established church, but for some reason get hoodwinked by the plastic promises of the "exciting" pentecostal churches. There was news item on the TV network news here recently, that was basically saying that the church is now cool in Wellington ( http://www.tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411749/613855 ). It is clear that the Pentecostal churches are winning the youth war... but at what cost. If you look at that article, the prime tools are bribery, and a solution to the problem of loneliness amongst students... come to our church and you have 200 instant friends... hmmm is it just me or is that a little bit deceptive...
For me, it is exceedingly simple. I want to have a relationship with God. I want it to be on His terms, not mine. I have no interest in the frippery of church, the traditions, the very latest techno-worship, all that stuff. For me it is about relationships, not structures or methodologies. Being in a church doesn't get me any closer to God, nor does what I wear or how I play my bass. God looks at the heart, and I attempt to look at His.
I have met many people over the years who have been infatuated by aspects of religion. For some it is religious art, for others a love of ceremony, for others a desire for power or control. I have met only a few who were simply interested in serving God.
For my last 20 years, being an airline captain has taken me to many parts of the world and to many churches. I have come to the conclusion that nobody has yet found the perfect form of church, in fact I would argue that there isn't one, and the only important thing is what is in the hearts of the participants. Full circle, huh? ;)
Anyway... I seem to have done what I promised not to, so I'll shut up now. Two last things: yours is one of the more genuine hearts I have come across recently, John; you are one of the "few" mentioned above - I doubt that I would ever be comfortable in your world, though. And I used to live in Ashton, so I identified with your prose.
Have more fun. I'm going to have a red wine now in your honour.
Simon