Steve Taylor posted on baptism – here. I commented. This post is a broader reflection, based on that comment, on baptism and borders. It is for me as much about the discipline of having to intentionally think about baptism, as it is about my baptism and what that means for me. It’s also the beginning of my attempt to grapple with a view of church that has both a centre and boundaries, boundaries that are paradoxically both about hospitality and exclusion. It’s a long post, so feel free to stop at this point. If you read on, I’d appreciate your thoughts; does what I’m saying make sense? Are there gaps? What is helpful?
It reflects on an essay by New Zealander, Sheila Prtichard who has helpfully written about a paradigm for spiritual growth based upon “digging deeper wells rather than on building higher fences” - DIGGING WELLS OR BUILDING FENCES: THE RISK OF SPIRITUAL GROWTH.
On further reflection I think Alan Roxburgh's ecclessiology, outlined in Chapter 7 of Missional Church (edited by Darrell Guder) provides a helpful way forward, keeping in tension, as it does, the notion of church as "bounded set" and church as "centered set." Baptism initiates a person into the "covenant community" (as a 'bounded' set)
Posted by: Paul Fromont | Monday, 22 November 2004 at 07:09 PM
It’s also the beginning of my attempt to grapple with a view of church that has both a centre and boundaries, boundaries that are paradoxically both about hospitality and exclusion.
Hi Paul, I read your post early in the morning and it took me most of the day to digest...alot of some pretty complex stuff and I still metabolizing some of it. I guess the big question for me is, did they in the book of Acts view baptism the same as we do today. I'm suggesting back then it was more of a "centered set" I don't think there were boundaries...at least not like today. Sure Paul had his issues with the other disciples around Jew and Gentile.I love the eaxample of Thomas meeting the Ethiopian enuch and baptism in the river. I sense before the boundaries of instituational churches were formed baptism was far more about the center...more about being baptised into the life of Jesus than a rite of passage accross some boundary.
I think for the non-believer that may be the biggest deterant...That church(es) are more identified by their boundaries than the center. I think back to my early Anglican beginings... I think I was expected or it sure felt that way...I had to get through all the stuff that makes up the boundaries before I could discover the center.There was learning and trying to understand the language of the Liturgy, baptism, confirmation the articles of faith, theological terminology and on and on. But the reality is all churches have these boundaries to some extent. But you raised a great question are the boundaries exclusive or inclusive...or do they take away from the center? I think we need to make the center so huge so dominant that the boundaries are not visible.
I think radical change comes from being center set oriented...changing or reconstrucing boundaries does nothing. I'm not a theologian, just a fool for Jesus, but I think of Luther and Justification by Faith ( Grace ) how it was center set oriented and because of it radical change.
Like I said a the start Paul, I'm still digesting alot of this...so I'll be back. Thanks for the food for thought, you've given me a huge meal.
Posted by: ron cole | Tuesday, 23 November 2004 at 10:33 PM