Prodigal Kiwi(s) Blog

William Cavanaugh – Is there a Eucharistic Missiology within his Theological Reflection on Church. ..?

Paul writes – More in relation to William Cavanaugh. As many of you will know from experience, a Jesus-following journey (like life itself) goes through phases. Our ‘diet’ changes, and at different times and places in our journey’s our needs change too. William Cavanaugh is a Roman Catholic theologian (thus his often greater emphasis on “Eucharist” rather than “Scripture”) that I’ve been aware of for some time, but it is only recently that I’ve explored his thinking in more detail.

I’m particularly interested in the ways in which his thinking might intesect with an inform a useful missiology in post-Christendom (typically) Western contexts.

I often wonder, “what if, for example, the central missiological questions in our Western contexts are less about gospel and culture engagement and more about having to do with what I call a eucharistic missiology, a missiology that emerges from what Cavanaugh describes as an “eucharistic ecclesiology ?”

Keith Watkins writes:

“…As part of the theological under girding of this ecclesiology, Cavanaugh shows that in the early centuries of the church's life two phrases relating to Christ's body were closely related. Corpus verum had referred to the church in the world, while corpus mysticum had referred to the eucharist as the reality that connected the crucified and risen Christ with the earthly continuation of himself. In the Middle Ages, however, the terms were reversed, so that the church on earth was thought of as Christ's mystical body and the eucharist was his true presence on earth…”

The church, as Scot McKnight reminds us (himself reflecting on Cavanaugh’s theology) “the Church is not a part of society; instead, it tells a different story”.

The central missional challenge, it seems to me, is therefore around how we re-learn and re-embody that story and the identity it nourishes, moving beyond what in so many contexts the church has become: ‘church’ as an audience that gathers on Sunday morning for an hour of so. 

Eucharistic theology is an important part of that “recovery” (of identity and story for the sake of participation in God’s mission), for as Cavanaugh makes clear, in the Eucharist, Christ gives his body and we are received into and renewed as Christ’s body sent.

“William Cavanaugh argues that God intends the Body of Christ to be a visible, public presence in the world and that the church has a role to play in God’s salvation plan. We are called to be the embodiment of God's love in the world.” The church is “God’s body language”.

So, as the ‘body’ gathers around the breaking of bread and the sharing of wine, its identification as Christ’s body for the sake of the world is underlined. The church is identified as a particular body – Christ’s body, the means through which Christ’s continuing mission is given expression as his individual members are sent out into their diverse and various contexts.

I’ve quoted Keith Watkins above, and for those of you who want an excellent overview of Cavanugh’s theological thinking, I’d recommend Watkins 2006 review of two of Cavanaugh’s foundational books, Torture and Eucharist: Theology, Politics, and the Body of Christ ( Dec. 1998) and Theopolitical Imagination: Christian Practices of Space and Time (Mar. 2003). Watkins also asks some great questions of Cavanaugh’s theology too.

The Human Side of Church: Group Processes in Congregations

Paul writes – I came across some interesting thinking by Dr. Sara Savage recently. It’s an excerpt from the book The Human Face of the Church: A Social Psychology and Pastoral Theology Resource for Pioneer and Traditional Ministry by Sara Savage and Eolene Boyd-Macmillan. You can listen to an interesting interview between Sara Savage and Alan Roxburgh here. She's reflecting on Mission in Western Culture.

Also interesting was this brief (Dec. 2006) Church Times article by Sara, The Darker Side of Parish Life, though it needs to be remembered that when we are talking about the “darker side of parish life”, we’re talking about the “dark side”, the shadow that is characteristic of each of us. Thus transformation at the level of a parish church begins, and continues alongside the transformative work of the Spirit in the hearts and lives of individuals; when our darkness and brokenness is healed.

Here’s the excerpt:

“…The sociologist Max Weber observed a cyclical process among religious movements that he called ‘the routinization of charisma’. Weber argued that any great vision requires a human process to carry it through time, sometimes in the form of ‘a man, a mission, a movement, or a monument’. Even with the Body of Christ, the life-giving charism has to be embodied in a routine – in some form of human organization. Yet, life-giving visions do not fit easily into neat boxes. So, the very process that gives the vision continuing life also begins to kill it. When the maintenance of the institution (which protects the charism) becomes the institution’s primary purpose, the death of the charism is on the horizon. Only a spiritual revival or reform will re-ignite the gift. In our era, fresh expressions of church and the re-traditioning of familiar forms of church march alongside many initiatives to re-ignite the gift…”

As I read this I recalled a very similar line of thought woven through a very interesting talk given by Pope Benedict XVI, New Outpourings of the Spirit: Movements in the Church. Reform, and new “movements” are an important and historically precedented means of “re-ignit[ing] the gift” (‘charism’) that the church offers to the world (i.e. recovering the reality of the church as a “sacrament to the world”; the means of enabling God to be present to human beings in “visible tangible form”). Maybe too, new “movements” will also “recover” the charism by initiating new and contextual forms (and ways) of being church…?

Mark Berry on Bishop Nazir-Ali on "the emerging church movement"

Paul writes – Mark Berry has put up an interesting post responding to some comments by Church of England Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali about “the emerging church movement. Here are a couple of excerpts:

“…I have a few questions/concerns about the Bishops [CofE Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali] words... firstly when we talk of Network Churches let us try to get beyond the consumerist language and culture that has been so embraced by the Church. Network church refers not to niche clubs but to finding a way to be together as community, connected to the wider network of communities and followers of Christ…

We live more networked lives, we may work in a place away from our housing, we move far more frequently and continue to sustain social relationships beyond our immediate locale, we may have family spread across the country, even the world etc. etc

If anything I see network churches seeking to move away from this consumerism and theologically/stylistically bound model and to be far more relational and diverse in expression. 

…In my years exploring these "emerging church movements" I have found the people involved to be far more aware of the wider riches and wisdom of Christian and other spirituality than any other experience I've had of Church and Christians... every other expression/denomination etc. seems intent on proving itself to be the right one... the real expressions of emerging church that I have experienced are far less focused on being right and far more interested in seeing the possibilities for change...”

You can read the whole post here.

Prof. Timothy Gorringe on Missiology in a culture of dispossession

Paul writes – Ben Edson helpfully shares some of the output of what he describes as a “fascinating meeting… Timothy Gorringe, Professor of Theology at Exeter University… Prof. Gorringe was reflecting on missiology in a culture of dispossession…” I’m sure it would have been fascinating. I’ve heard Gorringe lecture and have a few of his books – he’s a wonderful thinker.

Ben posts his notes (six-points in relation to contemporary mission) under the heading: Missiology in a culture of dispossession. Like Ben, much resonates in these notes for me. The content is differing and various ways is a consistent strand through many posts that appear on this blog – themes like: longing, desire, depth, meaning making, life and aliveness, counter-narratives and subversion, embodying alternative ways of being human and community, and the naming of “good news” (this is more than simply a recital of “Christ died for your sins etc.” It’s more deeply contextual and the result of deep listening). 

Here’s Ben’s final 3-points:

4.           Depth - Human beings are deep-water creatures that die in the shallows. Faith needs to be of a depth that people need. We cannot have that depth if the issue of justice is ducked...

5.           Life - Where is the life in the church? [We might want to ask what it means in practice for the church, for local churches to be sources of life in their local contexts…? When so many churches appear “dead” or “dying” what might resurrection-life look, feel, sound, smell and taste like – can life re-emerge out of seeming death? Paul] Life attracts people; worship needs to energise people for life.

6.           Resistance - The church must become a community of resistance. A community that subverts the cultural norm, a community that dismantles the dominant consciousness and offers an alternative to it.

You can read his first three points here. Does anyone know if Gorringe has any new books on these themes underway? Is his Furthering Humanity: A Theology of Culture worth reading…?

Slagging the Establishment Off…?

Paul writes - A number of people have recently picked up on a blog post originating from Mark Sayers in Australia. I’m not going to comment on the points, but instead point you to Steve Taylor’s mention of the post (here), and his additional commentary, which sits well with me as an observer and as a New Zealander.

Although, in my experience, Steve’s sixth point (in a NZ context) often (but not always) has less to do with “slagging off” existing/established “Mainline, Evangelical, Pentecostal” churches which many of us have left, but rather about struggling to find ways of creating or finding space within these congregations that allows for continuing growth, and which offers the possibility of re-engaging the tradition(s) in ways that contextualize and make meaningful the radical nature of our having drawn into the unfolding drama of the Scriptural narrative .

Many of us (needfully) struggle against ways of being church and while this may sound like “slagging off” the established its about giving voice to our disappointments and frustrations as a way of processing these, of healing, and moving forward into other possibilities. Often too, it’s a legitimate response to established churches being unwilling to make the kind of healthy space available in which questions, doubts, and alternative perspectives can be raised and processed. Often the critique is about established churches unwillingness to accompany or resource people as they continue to grow and as they transition within and between so-called “faith-stages”. This too is legitimate, and it would be sad if it was written off or ignored as “slagging off” the establishment. I’m pretty sure this isn’t what Steve has in mind when he talks about slagging off, but I wanted to make an alternative perspective explicit.

Many too find church to be, as Jenny McIntosh describes it, “a place of incongruence, non-authenticity and irrelevance to what is going on in the rest of life.” This too is a legitimate critique and opportunity for change.

For many this needful struggle, a struggle to find an authentic and meaningful expression of faith (cf. the understanding of faith as a journey). Others, like Israel in the wilderness discover that this marginal experience is often (for them) a needful part of a change or growth cycle, one that Walter Brueggemann names as: orientation, disorientation and new orientation. While (to my mind) Alan Roxburgh talks about it in terms of: stability, discontinuity, Disembedding, transition, and re-formation. This marginal experience is a space in which to grapple with core questions about church and its purpose. This too if often needful in a growing faith that takes questions about church and church experience seriously.

I say all this simply to say that all that might sound like “slagging off” the church is not always necessarily so, and care needs to be exercised. This struggle with church can be a necessary part of re:imagining church, re:engaging the narrative and tradition (the “womb” cf. Maggi Dawn) that gave birth to the Church in all its diversity, and to re:forming it.  Also, another thought; there is a legitimate critique in the opposite direction. You might not want to use the expression "slagging off", but many established churches distance, ignore or undermine the legitmate possibilities for change and growth inherent in the new and in calls for re-formation.   

Steve’s post includes the link to Mark Sayers original post.

Hyphenated Apostles.

Paul writes – One of the ‘new’ expressions of church that most inspires me is Church of the Apostles in Fremont, Seattle.

“…Last week [Phyllis Tickle], I was in Seattle at Fremont Abbey, which is the home structure or base for The Church of the Apostles, where an African-American female friend and colleague of mine, Karen Ward, is abbess and where a significant portion of the Fremont area of Seattle seems to gather to do its worship or to do its socializing or maybe just to lick its wounds, re-group, and go forth into the world renewed. None of those exercises is a bad thing for a church or parish to be engaged in, and most assuredly none is a bad thing for the folk who are the beating heart of Fremont Abbey…”

Read the whole reflection here. Thanks to Mark Berry for drawing it to my attention.

Re-enchanting Christianity: Faith for today by Dave Tomlinson

Paul writes – I’ve listened and re-listened to an excellent 2008 Greenbelt talk that Dave Tomlinson (author of the very useful The Post-Evangelical (1995 / Revised US edition 2003). You can order the talk here. This is how it was promoted:

“…Introducing his new book Re-enchanting Christianity, Dave explores how Christianity, once deconstructed, can become credible again - not by returning to some lost innocence, but by discovering a realistic faith that reconciles heart and head: which grapples courageously with questions about life after death, hell, the resurrection, other faiths etc, but also offers a gritty spirituality for the 21st century…”

Dave talks of the Post-Evangelical as about his dis-enchantment with church (and Christianity) and his new book as about his “re-enchantment”. The new book is still not out in the UK (though publication date was the 29^th August 2008). You can preorder it here (UK) or here (US / 30 Nov. 2008). If its anything like the talk then my early sense is that it will be a very useful book for a great many of us with more questions than answers, and for those of us struggling either in church contexts, or like me, post-church and wondering what church, moving forward, might look and feel like. 

Here’s an excerpt (great quote from Lenny Bruce!), much of it forms part of the talk highlighted above.

“Every day people are straying away from the church and going back to God.”
Lenny Bruce

“…People are no less spiritual today than they were in the past, but they are a lot less religious. A disconnect has occurred between religion and spirituality: people no longer see religion or church as the natural setting in which to explore or express their spiritual aspirations. So they are drifting away from churches in droves. However they are not doing so because they no longer believe in God, or because they have no spiritual hunger, but because in their experience church is neither offering a faith they can believe in, nor an existential spirituality that can excite or satisfy the deeper yearnings of the soul. Many long to reconnect with the sacred mystery of life, to discover their place in the cosmos, but they don’t see church or religion as a way of achieving this…I see no future in the twenty-first century for expressions of Christianity that are not Spirited. Our world longs for numinosity: for a sense of awe and mystery, for sacredness, spirituality and enchantment, for something ‘more’ than the purely rational and cerebral. If the church fails to engage with, and cater to, this longing, it has no real future…”

Some (written) content from the talk can also be found in sections of this article…

Is seeing where God was at work in the world and jumping in to help etc, the last gasp of a Church that still believes itself to be at the Centre rather than Marginal in its Existence?

Paul writes – I’ve recently finished reading an essay by Robert W. Jenson, What is a Post-Christian (included in this interesting collection of essays) in which he argues that in a post-Church / post-Christian (I’d say “post-Christendom”) context the invitation of the Church is to uphold and embody its distinctive beliefs. In many ways his argument is not dissimilar from the likes of Stanley Hauerwas. 

Jenson writes:

“We … need to face [the] fact often spoken of but rarely acted upon: that the West is now a mission field. We can no longer count on the culture doing half our work for us. On a mission field, the church has to do its own work, and that means first of all that it has to know what is not … in the culture, that it hopes to bring to it. Which is to say: it must know and cultivate its difference from that culture. All that talk a few years ago about the world setting the agenda, about seeing where God was at work in the world and jumping in to help etc, was the last gasp of the church’s establishment in the West, of its erstwhile ability to suppose that what the culture nurtured as good had to be congruent with the good the church had to bring…” (Pp. 29-30).

The first thing that strikes me in this quote is what on the surface seems like a critique of a popular definition of mission which goes like this: “mission is discerning what it is that God is doing and joining in”; it’s a way of talking about mission that prioriterises what God is doing and its an invitation to partnership and collaboration.  Is this what Jenson is critiquing? A reading of the preceding and following paragraphs doesn’t really help!

Emerging from the collapse of the Christendom mindset

Paul writes – Andrew Perriman, is the author of the very engaging Re:Mission – Biblical Mission for a Post-Biblical Church (I really appreciate it’s willingness to engage and enter into the Biblical narrative – too much so-called “emerging” or “missional” literature functions at the level of strategy, cultural engagement , and the sociological / philosophical discussion (no in themselves bad things) and any engagement with the Biblical narrative and specific biblical texts is incidental and peripheral. I highly recommend it Re:Mission). 

Anyway, Andrew is interviewed by Darren King for Precipice Magazine.com. It has in view one of Andrew’s earlier books. Re:Missionwas published in late 2007.  Here’s an excerpt from the interview:   

“…One of the hallmarks of the Emerging Church is its desire, it commitment, to move beyond traditionalism, to examine various aspects of Christian faith with an openness to new answers- and new questions. While critics often (unfairly) accuse the movement of "rejecting the Bible", the reality is that those immersed within the EC conversation are often willing to embrace the complexities of the Bible in ways that are unfamiliar to others. And embracing the Bible means entering into the story, understanding the journey as it was for the earliest believers, as part of the process in receiving it as our own…

…I think that a new way of understanding ourselves as church is emerging from the collapse of the Christendom mindset. Whether or not we refer to that as the ‘emerging church’ or imagine that it amounts to a well-defined movement, it needs a congruent theology; and I believe that that theology needs to be confidently and consistently biblical. What we mean by ‘biblical’, of course, is another matter – that’s the third part.

… I think that the basic ‘theological’ challenge we face is, on the one hand, to disentangle our minds from the dilapidated mental infrastructure of Christendom, and on the other, to design for ourselves a new post-Christendom infrastructure. It’s as though the house in which we have lived for the last 1600 years has collapsed – it was too badly built to withstand the storms of rationalism and floods of postmodernism. So we are currently homeless and somewhat bewildered and frightened. Most of us are living in makeshift shelters constructed from stuff we have salvaged from the wreckage. We need to build a new worldview, a new plausibility structure, a new theological paradigm, within which to be a meaningful and sustainable missional community. That will be a long and difficult task.

… I think we need to grasp again how scripture engages realistically with the experience in time of a historical community. Scripture is the work of a people making sense of its past, present and future at different stages in a narrative; and if we fail to take into account either the historical experience of the community or the narrative structure of its self-understanding, we are bound to misinterpret.

You can read the whole interview here.

“New Edge Spirituality” in a Digital Era

Paul writes – Jonny Baker also picks up on what I think is a very good little interview with Barry Taylor. The interviewer is Ian Mobsby (who wants to come to NZ in November 2008 – provided Cambridge is included, is there anyone who’d want to share the costs?) whose latest book (The Becoming of G-d) looks really interesting, though I have yet to get it off my bookshelf and read it. Barry’s latest book is Entertainment Theology: New Edge Spirituality in a Digital Democracy .It’s on its way to me, and from what I’ve seen it’s going to be a very useful read especially for those of us in post-Church contexts wondering about the relationship between gospel, Spirit, cultural engagement and the everyday, what it means to be “church”, and the absence of a meaningful and humble Christian voice (and presence) in the public arena, whether that be in the workplace, in leadership, in our local communities, neighborhoods etc

Here’s an excerpt from the interview:

“…As you know, some research published in the last 5 years has suggested that there is no residual spirituality within contemporary culture. This research draws on interviews of younger people leaving a nightclub. They argue that what is needed is not an engagement with new/old forms of mysticism, but more of a proclamation of Christianity ­ does your research have something to say to this research which has been quite influential in some places in the UK?

Yeah, I read a lot about that--Unfortunately, I think the research was a bit weak, or at least a bit myopic. For one thing, I think they were asking the wrong questions. There is no easy way to say this--the questions were too loaded and 'too Christian'--I don't mean to attack the validity of the project as much as to challenge the approach--the spirituality that exists in digital culture tends not to look familiar to some who orient their lives in more formal or traditional understandings of spirituality, or who enter situations with pre-conceived ideas about what is going on--I think we have entered, or are entering, a new phase of religious/spiritual self-understanding and what is emerging doesn't look like what has gone before. As many others have noted, the return to God--the re-enchantment of the West, as some term it, that has occurred over the past few years, is not necessarily a return to old ways or old gods or concepts of God.