Comments on: Peter Corney on the future http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/ musings from those on the journey Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:04:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: bec http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-145019 bec Tue, 22 Aug 2006 08:22:28 +0000 http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-145019 I haven't read all of the above responses, but my initial reaction upon reading the post was: it sounds to me like Peter was talking about how to build a successful institution, rather than spread the Good News. Mission is mentioned once. Pretty much everything there could apply to any other sort of enterprise. Just a thought... I haven’t read all of the above responses, but my initial reaction upon reading the post was: it sounds to me like Peter was talking about how to build a successful institution, rather than spread the Good News. Mission is mentioned once. Pretty much everything there could apply to any other sort of enterprise.

Just a thought…

]]> By: phil http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144968 phil Mon, 21 Aug 2006 05:57:19 +0000 http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144968 Nice challenging quote Lance - I am elevating that to its own thread. Nice challenging quote Lance - I am elevating that to its own thread.

]]> By: Lance http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144966 Lance Mon, 21 Aug 2006 04:40:00 +0000 http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144966 "American pastors are abandoning their posts, left and right, and at an alarming rate. They are not leaving their churches and getting other jobs. Congregations still pay their salaries. Their names remain on the church stationary and they continue to appear in pulpits on Sundays. But they are abandoning their posts, their calling. They have gone whoring after other gods. What they do with their time under the guise of pastoral ministry hasn't the remotest connection with what the church's pastors have done for most of twenty centuries. A few of us are angry about it. We are angry because we have been deserted.... It is bitterly disappointing to enter a room full of people whom you have every reason to expect share the quest and commitments of pastoral work and find within ten minutes that they most definitely do not. They talk of images and statistics. They drop names. They discuss influence and status. Matters of God and the soul and Scripture are not grist for their mills. The pastors of America have metamorphosed into a company of shopkeepers, and the shops they keep are churches. They are preoccupied with shopkeeper's concerns--how to keep the customers happy, how to lure customers away from competitors down the street, how to package the goods so that the customers will lay out more money. Some of them are very good shopkeepers. They attract a lot of customers, pull in great sums of money, develop splendid reputations. Yet it is still shopkeeping; religious shopkeeping, to be sure, but shopkeeping all the same. The marketing strategies of the fast-food franchise occupy the waking minds of these entrepreneurs; while asleep they dream of the kind of success that will get the attention of journalists. The biblical fact is that there are no successful churches. There are, instead, communities of sinners, gathered before God week after week in towns and villages all over the world. The Holy Spirit gathers them and does his work in them. In these communities of sinners, one of the sinners is called pastor and given a designated responsibility in the community. The pastor's responsibility is to keep the community attentive to God. It is this responsibility that is being abandoned in spades. ----- From the introduction of "Working the Angles" written by Eugene Peterson." Via http://www.stupidchurchpeople.com/2006/08/this-guy-is-angry-at-pastors.html “American pastors are abandoning their posts, left and right, and at an alarming rate. They are not leaving their churches and getting other jobs. Congregations still pay their salaries. Their names remain on the church stationary and they continue to appear in pulpits on Sundays. But they are abandoning their posts, their calling. They have gone whoring after other gods. What they do with their time under the guise of pastoral ministry hasn’t the remotest connection with what the church’s pastors have done for most of twenty centuries.

A few of us are angry about it. We are angry because we have been deserted…. It is bitterly disappointing to enter a room full of people whom you have every reason to expect share the quest and commitments of pastoral work and find within ten minutes that they most definitely do not. They talk of images and statistics. They drop names. They discuss influence and status. Matters of God and the soul and Scripture are not grist for their mills.

The pastors of America have metamorphosed into a company of shopkeepers, and the shops they keep are churches. They are preoccupied with shopkeeper’s concerns–how to keep the customers happy, how to lure customers away from competitors down the street, how to package the goods so that the customers will lay out more money.

Some of them are very good shopkeepers. They attract a lot of customers, pull in great sums of money, develop splendid reputations. Yet it is still shopkeeping; religious shopkeeping, to be sure, but shopkeeping all the same. The marketing strategies of the fast-food franchise occupy the waking minds of these entrepreneurs; while asleep they dream of the kind of success that will get the attention of journalists.

The biblical fact is that there are no successful churches. There are, instead, communities of sinners, gathered before God week after week in towns and villages all over the world. The Holy Spirit gathers them and does his work in them. In these communities of sinners, one of the sinners is called pastor and given a designated responsibility in the community. The pastor’s responsibility is to keep the community attentive to God. It is this responsibility that is being abandoned in spades.
—–
From the introduction of “Working the Angles” written by Eugene Peterson.”

Via http://www.stupidchurchpeople.com/2006/08/this-guy-is-angry-at-pastors.html

]]> By: alan http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144960 alan Mon, 21 Aug 2006 00:13:30 +0000 http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144960 I think the first question to be asked when astute church politicians like Peter make speecehs is not what they say,but why and to whom they speak(OK thats 2 questions).Why - could it have anything to do with the dilemma the melb anglicans have without a bishop? And note that it was given to the cream of the "low church"/evangelical end of the anglicans-nothing wrong with that but it does shape a speech. I agree with much that is said, but think he sets up straw men/women and then shoots them down;bit like some denominational staff talking about the emerging church,and the emerging church talking about deminations! His "myths" are nothing new. Myth 1 - who still thinks all angl congreg must look the same,apart those in sydney?.Who still believes that "local communities are residentially stable",good sociology has never been the strength of clerics and gurus.And the only people believing the quality-quantity myth must surely be the prosperity theological charlatans. The most important thing that anglians like Corney can help us all with is the whole notion of "church'. One of the challenges the den that you and i belong to Phil ,and i suspect the emerging church process, is the difficulty we have in seeing the "church" as anything beyond the local.Is the church something beyond that - and I think anglicans can help us. PS Good to know that we're "us" and "them" over there, are "ethnics" - now thats good theology and sound sociology- yep they certainly need churches! I think the first question to be asked when astute church politicians like Peter make speecehs is not what they say,but why and to whom they speak(OK thats 2 questions).Why - could it have anything to do with the dilemma the melb anglicans have without a bishop? And note that it was given to the cream of the “low church”/evangelical end of the anglicans-nothing wrong with that but it does shape a speech.
I agree with much that is said, but think he sets up straw men/women and then shoots them down;bit like some denominational staff talking about the emerging church,and the emerging church talking about deminations!
His “myths” are nothing new.
Myth 1 - who still thinks all angl congreg must look the same,apart those in sydney?.Who still believes that “local communities are residentially stable”,good sociology has never been the strength of clerics and gurus.And the only people believing the quality-quantity myth must surely be the prosperity theological charlatans.
The most important thing that anglians like Corney can help us all with is the whole notion of “church’.
One of the challenges the den that you and i belong to Phil ,and i suspect the emerging church process, is the difficulty we have in seeing the “church” as anything beyond the local.Is the church something beyond that - and I think anglicans can help us.
PS Good to know that we’re “us” and “them” over there, are “ethnics” - now thats good theology and sound sociology- yep they certainly need churches!

]]> By: Gareth 'LovesTha' Pye http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144958 Gareth 'LovesTha' Pye Sun, 20 Aug 2006 23:46:16 +0000 http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144958 I think his 4 views of the church currently is very accurate for the vast majority of situations. Very good read. I think his 4 views of the church currently is very accurate for the vast majority of situations. Very good read.

]]> By: backyardmissonary http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144946 backyardmissonary Sun, 20 Aug 2006 09:48:08 +0000 http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144946 um... good question. i think its something to do with how it feels to me. i am trying to articulate why i felt that... maybe the 4/10/9 point lists?... maybe - i dunno - its a feeling. i might come back to it! um…

good question.

i think its something to do with how it feels to me.

i am trying to articulate why i felt that… maybe the 4/10/9 point lists?… maybe - i dunno - its a feeling.

i might come back to it!

]]> By: phil http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144943 phil Sun, 20 Aug 2006 07:52:17 +0000 http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144943 I agree that there is nothing much earth shattering but I think it is good food to digest and sums up the challenge for established congregations pretty well. But what makes it modernist? I don't see the summary of the situation as modernist or post-modernist but rather just a summary. What am I not seeing guys? I agree that there is nothing much earth shattering but I think it is good food to digest and sums up the challenge for established congregations pretty well.

But what makes it modernist?

I don’t see the summary of the situation as modernist or post-modernist but rather just a summary.

What am I not seeing guys?

]]> By: Andrew http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144942 Andrew Sun, 20 Aug 2006 07:07:12 +0000 http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144942 Phil, In Peter's 4 ways to see ourself as a church (the first point) they all seem a negative. Are there only 4 or are there some positive ones? As I read through this summary I didn't find much new in it but as I kept reading I was reminded that we keep needing this 'bread & butter' from our forebears. There's is a language that we need to listen to or we lose something. But, yes I'd agree with Hammo that there is an underlying assessment of the situation that feels, naturally modernist - but that ain't a sin in a culture like ours - we keep voting back John Howard. Andrew Phil,

In Peter’s 4 ways to see ourself as a church (the first point) they all seem a negative. Are there only 4 or are there some positive ones?

As I read through this summary I didn’t find much new in it but as I kept reading I was reminded that we keep needing this ‘bread & butter’ from our forebears. There’s is a language that we need to listen to or we lose something. But, yes I’d agree with Hammo that there is an underlying assessment of the situation that feels, naturally modernist - but that ain’t a sin in a culture like ours - we keep voting back John Howard.

Andrew

]]> By: phil http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144938 phil Sun, 20 Aug 2006 04:27:30 +0000 http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144938 I don't see that Hamo. How is it modernist? I see an emphasis on moving beyond the parish model and establishing new missional congregations, planting in established areas (sub-cultures) and fostering more of pioneering leadership style as being the challenges. He may not use the same words as you or I may use but the meaning seems to be the same. I don’t see that Hamo. How is it modernist?

I see an emphasis on moving beyond the parish model and establishing new missional congregations, planting in established areas (sub-cultures) and fostering more of pioneering leadership style as being the challenges.

He may not use the same words as you or I may use but the meaning seems to be the same.

]]> By: backyardmissonary http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144931 backyardmissonary Sun, 20 Aug 2006 00:59:04 +0000 http://www.signposts.org.au/2006/08/19/peter-corney-on-the-future/#comment-144931 With all due respect to Peter, who has certainly been a very successful church leader, this sounds like a very 'modernist' take on the current situation. It doesn't sound unlike what he was saying 10 years ago. With all due respect to Peter, who has certainly been a very successful church leader, this sounds like a very ‘modernist’ take on the current situation.

It doesn’t sound unlike what he was saying 10 years ago.

]]>