Peter Rollins brings his Insurrection Tour to a close in Brooklyn, New York. As always he asks some good questions and brings ideas and thoughts to the table that might be worth contemplating for a minute or two.

Listen to him here.

or watch him below;

Peter Rollins at Baylor University from Peter Rollins on Vimeo.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Yoder is best remembered for his reflections on Christian ethics. Rejecting the assumption that human history is driven by coercive power, Yoder argued that it was rather God — working in, with, and through the nonviolent, non-resistant community of disciples of Jesus — who has been the ultimate force in human affairs. If the Christian church in the past made alliances with political rulers, it was because it had lost confidence in this truth.

He called the arrangement whereby the state and the church each supported the goals of the other Constantinianism, and he regarded it as a dangerous and constant temptation. Yoder argued that Jesus himself rejected this temptation, even to the point of dying a horrible and cruel death. Resurrecting Jesus from the dead was, in this view, God’s way of vindicating Christ’s unwavering obedience.

Me, myself and I

I ended off my previous post in this series with a mild criticism on how the western church often views itself as a group of individuals satisfying ones own individual needs by the product offered and packaged as Church. It is a clear tendency in the western Church that members dissatisfied with the theology, the leader, the child ministry or what ever it can be leaves quite easily. This even if one has been in the church for many years and would seemingly have close friendships and relationships with the larger church body. I would argue that this is a clear example of what happens when the old systems of modernism collide with the postmodern mind.

One reason for this is the foundation the western church rests on. It has often been perceived as a package that is consumed and crafted to meet my individual need, when it doesn’t meet my need, I either need the leader to create a new package for me that meets my need or leave and find a package that meets my individual need somewhere else. Was this what Church was meant to be? Or was it meant to be something else? Something where theology, politics, power or anything else would  draw us towards each other,not alienate us from each other, a place where the differences could flourish and be lived out in a fruitful manner. Where family is more important than individuality, where the organic is more important that keeping up a safe status quo?

The reality of a postmodern world

In the wake of modernity the postmodern world responds in contradictory ways. Fragmentation and polarization on the one hand and syncretism on the other. This condition might seem unhealthy, and while there is much that is not healthy about our postmodern context, there are profound creative and redemptive possibilities in this seemingly contradictory ideas.

The word contradiction and paradox are two words that the modern mind find offensive and even dangerous. Post-moderns living in the aftermath of a world by a desire to control and dominate (very much also in the church) are often delighted by notions that defy this easy categorization.

Our postmodern world is a world of profound fragmentation. After modernity this is understandable. Within modernity a select few held power. Now everything is up for grabs.

Balkanization

One word used to describe this is balkanization. This means to divied one place, one idea, or one group of people from each other for any number of reasons. Life is being balkanized. It is fragmenting. The themes of progress and optimism that unified and under-girded the modern project have largely evaporated, and we have been left adrift in a disjointed world where meaning and value is constantly being contested by people willing to fight for it till there death.

Is it any surprise that new kings of churches are emerging out of the husks of these former structures that are struggling to keep pace and adapt to this strange new world?

In a world of balkanization and atomization we are desperate for space to engage, create, and respond free from the power games that are being played in so many circles around us. In a shrinking globalized world we are desperate to learn what it means to be in relationship to the other- to the alien in our midst (or perhaps we are the alien in the midst) for the purpose of dialogue and engagement.

How can we live in this new reality

We desperately need to discover, recover, learn, and live out the ancient Christian practice of hospitality, which is the postmodern means of evangelism.

We do not need more Christian leaders building church empires at a time when our culture is dismantling other such structure around us. We must deconstruct ourselves in love.

A postmodern context requires leaders who instead of seeking to dominate the environment are willing to become environmentalists- people who create spaces that allow Gods people to have the possibility of an encounter with God and other people. Such an environment allows people to discover a future together  under God instead of reducing them to mere pawns serving some large agenda that comes from outside themselves.

Can Postmodernism save us?

Can postmodernism save us? In many ways I believe it can. It can save us from the institution, it can save us from materialism. It can save us from individualism. It can save us from being arrogant. It can save us from being powerful.

In my next post I will ask a question that deals with syncretism. Does everything go? Is it possible in a christian context to blend many different “whatever it could be”?

Read part 1 here; Postmodernity, should we be afraid?

Read part 2 here ; Modernity, the cost?

What is the cost of progress?

Modern travel, modern educational systems, modern medicine, and modern food production are a few examples of the ways in which humanity’s lot has improved through the progress achieved during this era.

However as the twentieth century waned a collective questioning of the assumptions of modernity emerged in many quarters, not least in my quarter.

According to Tim Keel and N. T Wright two theologians I draw on in this article, The very notion of progress itself is questioned. They and others ask; how is it defined and measured, and by whom?

What is the cost of progress?

In the modern story, reality is that which is observable, measurable and repeatable. Everything that is available, accessible and verifiable to the five senses.

No wonder that anything beyond the senses was ignored. Materialism was birthed and the matters of the soul were ignored or reinterpreted within this tightly controlled version of reality.

Spiritual life?

When the life of the spirit is ignored, people will seek to feed the hunger of a neglected soul with the only nourishment available. In my context: the consumptive acquisition of material goods. If spiritually engaged, it is often reduced and turned into on more commodity to be packaged, sold, and consumed like so many other aspects of modern life. In a incredibly individualistic way.

The western church

The western church has been existing within this framework of reality. Church shopping has become the defining metaphor for deciding which community of faith satisfies ones needs. My needs.

Churches rarely possess a corporate understanding of themselves as a people but rather as one more collection of individuals choosing to be together based on similar preferences (music,preaching,programs etc.)

How does the postmodern world respond in the wake of modernity?

read part 3 here; Can postmodernity save us?

Read part 1 here; Postmodernity, should we be afraid?

Post-modernity

I have been discussing the topic of post-modernity with colleagues from many religious backgrounds.

You might be aware of the cultural phenomenon of post-modernity if not its philosophical underpinnings.

Trying to describe or approximate post-modernity as a philosophy or culture is no easy task. Just type it into wikipedia and you will see what I mean.

But as everything else we know little about , it creates fear or distance.

For many of those I speak with, the arrival of post-modernity is a portent of all that is evil and dangerous about our world.

I would offer a more modest assessment : It is simply the context of the world in which we live, thus filled with possibilities and dangers like any other context. ( taken from the thoughts of Tim Keel. Read more in his book “Intuitive Leadership”)

Modernity

Modernity was a time of grand narratives about the nature and destiny of humans freed from the constraints of ignorance and superstition. Under such themes, Western civilization sought to colonize both the natural and intellectual world, unifying it into classifiable systems by reducing material existence into distinct, separate and easily identifiable categories.

Knowledge was broken down into disciplines or fields of inquiry.

People and populations were likewise identified, reduced, and categorized, whether by race or class or the combination of both.  The occupation and exploitation of foreign lands and native populations, called “colonialism” emerged in modernity as most European countries sought to expand boundaries and secure resources.

Theology + modernity = true

In the wake of the protestant reformation, religious authority and structures became tied to emerging nation states. State sponsored churches were in many cases the forerunners of  what we now know as denominations.

Theologians systematized theology(Christology, pneumatology, soteriology, ecclesiology etc) in much the same ways scientists systematized the natural world. Intelligence was given a measurable quotient.

Merchants produced and distributed goods and resources mechanistically, that is, by assembly lines in factories and via efficient, modern transportation systems. It goes without saying that those in control of the systems and structures that framed and supported modernity wielded enormous power.

What did modernity cost ?

And how are we now to live, engage and relate to a postmodern world and reality?

Read part 2 here ; Modernity, the cost?

“Children do not first and foremost think of a dad or mum as lawgiver and judge. Children are interested in ensuring that dad is a dad, that mum is mum”

Irenaeus understanding is that we are in a family relationship. We are in a close relationship with God that exists around us and in us.

Read more about Ireneus here

I recently finished reading 3 books on biblical authority ( Bibelsyn och Bibelbruk by biskopsmötet 1964, Bibeltolkningens problematik by Sven Ingebrand and Texter och tolkningar by tryggve Kronholm, all in swedish).

I have since then been exploring the topic also in other spheres of our world like here on the web. I came over a fantastic article by N T Wright, called ; How Can the Bible be Authoritative? I found it through Rob Bells “Velvit Elvis” If you have 16 minutes today and you want to read a short and brilliant piece about the bible, about why and how it has Authority this is what you should read.

Rob Bell writes the following about it:

“The best thing I have ever read about the Bible is a transcript of a lecture given by the British Scholar N. T. Wright called….”( the above article)

Here is a sample;

“Evangelicals and Biblical Authority
It seems to be that evangelicalism has flirted with, and frequently held long-running love affairs with all of these different methods of using the Bible, all of these attempts to put into practice what turns out to be quite an inarticulate sense that it is somehow the real locus of authority. And that has produced what one can now see in many so-called scriptural churches around the world – not least in North America. It seems to be the case that the more that you insist that you are based on the Bible, the more fissiparous you become; the church splits up into more and more little groups, each thinking that they have got biblical truth right. And in my experience of teaching theological students I find that very often those from a conservative evangelical background opt for one such view as the safe one, the one with which they will privately stick, from which they will criticize others.”

he goes on to conclude this part of the article;

“My conclusion, then, is this: that the regular views of scripture and its authority which we find not only outside but also inside evangelicalism fail to do justice to what the Bible actually is – a book, an ancient book, an ancient narrative book. They function by turning that book into something else, and by implying thereby that God has, after all, given us the wrong sort of book. This is a low doctrine of inspiration, whatever heights are claimed for it and whatever words beginning with “in” are used to label it. I propose that what we need to do is to re-examine the concept of authority itself and see if we cannot do a bit better.”

Todd Hunter took over the leadership of Vineyard after John Wimber passed away. He has now founded a new organisation called “3hreeisenough.” He is also working with the Emerging Church in different ways. In an interview with Next-wave was asked about Vineyard and John Wimber;

What was the most important thing you learned from John Wimber (one of the key founders of the Vineyard movement)?

That the Kingdom of God was the main message of Jesus and the main reality in which Christians are to walk and invite others. Christian life is “eternal life” and that life starts now. I love the way Eugene Peterson puts it in The Message: “real life…life, life and more life to come”. It is life derived from and lived in the Kingdom God by the power of the Holy Spirit—in a way that others experience as for their good, especially the least, the last and missing. And…that pursuing this kingdom life necessitates risk and learning—especially on the part of leaders. There is a reason the disciples sometimes came off as nerds or dummies in the New Testament—they took the risk of walking a totally unknown road—life in the kingdom.

Todd, as Director of the Association for Vineyard Churches for 7 years, what did you learn about the church by the time you left in 2001 that you didn’t know in 1994?

As president of Vineyard churches, I was asked to serve as a board and executive committee member of the National Association of Evangelicals. This gave me the wonderful benefit of a behind the scenes look into scores of denominations. Plus, as an avid observer of the sociology of religion, I participated in think tanks at some of the best academic institutions in the country. I had no business being there; I didn’t earn it—it was sheer gift. But it gave me a great view of the wider church. Here is what I learned: the church knows it is increasingly marginalized by society. This reality is often called “post-Christendom”. There is a large and legitimate debate about what form that will take in America, whether it will follow the pattern of “secular” Europe or take on some distinctly American version. Here is what I took away from what I learned: what a great time to be alive, to be a Christ-follower, to have a chance to shape what “the new normal” will look like.

I’ve been trying to make a contribution to the new normal ever since.

Being a Pastor in a Vineyard church, I often get the questions; what is Vineyard? What are your values? And what is unique about you, or what is Vineyards emphasis? What is makes Vineyard different?

As an answer to these questions,I will for the next couple of weeks write a few thoughts about Vineyard as a worldwide denomination, but I will also narrow it down to Gothenburg Vineyard. I will look at the values, the doctrines and give a presentation and comment on them.

In Alexander Venters book; “doing Church” he tells some of the thoughts behind the early beginnings of Vineyard as a movement. When John Wimber first started the Vineyard movement one of the factors that strongly influenced John Wimber, was his commitment to be relevant to the generation of his day. They included the postwar generation born between 1945 and 1965.

They sought meaning and would not just accept everything as truth. They wanted reality and not pretense. As a Church growth consultant John Wimber saw first hand how the church in America was not really what he believed it should be.

He realized how so many people found Church to be boring, out of touch, unrealistic and irrelevant. And the very people who perceived and experianced church to be this way, well, if they got involved they would just mess it all up.

A part of Wimbers vision was to reach these non- believers, the irreligious, the fearful, the hurting, the disillusioned and create an environment that they could relate to and be at home in.

Vineyard today wants to continue this legacy and a we have put it doen as foundational value. We our church to look like that. On our web page (under; vår forsamling) the following is written:

Vineyard USA 25th Anniversary from Vineyard USA on Vimeo.