experimenting, pioneering, blazing new paths…
Alan Hirsch emailed me this great quote.
“We never have expected to hit upon that final stable structure. This is important for a church to understand, for when it starts to be the church it will be constantly be adventuring out into places where there are no tried and tested ways. If the church in our day has few prophetic voices above the noise of the street, perhaps in large part it is because the pioneering spirit has become foreign to it. It shows little willingness to explore new ways. Where it does it has often been called an experiment. We would say the church of Christ is never an experiment, but where that church is true to it’s mission it will be experimenting, pioneering, blazing new paths, seeking how to speak the reconciling words of God to it’s own age.” It cannot do this if it is held captive by the structures of another day.”
(Elizabeth O’Connor….Call to Commitment)
What do you think?
April 9th, 2007 at 9:27 pm
Has anyone read the book written by Rick Joyner “Visions of the Harvest”?
It is the only Joyner book I have read but if I remember correctly it was in essence about the church splitting…basically into movements. Has anyone else read it? Does it resonate with anyone?
April 10th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
No.
Hope that helps
April 10th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
haven’t read it, sounds interesting…where can you get it?
April 10th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
Koorong or Word should have it. I see if I can find it; get it out and try to explain myself a little better.
Very droll Greg the explorer.
April 11th, 2007 at 10:26 am
Well it is interesting that Alan sent that, yet he constantly refers to structures in ancient ages, and in completely different cultures. I do believe that the very nature of God, (triunity) suggests to us the community is of utmost importance, Jesus and the early church lived this as an example. Therefore I can say with complete passion that any structure that by its nature hinders true community is against the aims of Christ no matter what the culture around it says.
rev
April 11th, 2007 at 11:06 am
Hmmmm…I agree with the Rev’s comment that if a structure hinders true community, it is against the aims of Christ.
I wonder, however, whteher the fact that there are few prophetic voices above the noise of the street is because of the loss of the pioneering spirit? I actually think that with the media operating the way it does, it’s actually difficult to get “above the noise of the street” UNLESS you have fairly mainstream acceptance, OR alternatively, you’re soooo out there as to be of interest to the media. In other words, I’m not sure that being radical = being heard!
April 11th, 2007 at 11:15 am
another thought…
I actually sometimes find this whole emerging church emphasis on “new stuff”, “blazing new paths” etc a bit culturally-biased. Now before anyone jumps down my throat, hear me out!!
I think that on the one hand, the church in the West is very, very stuck, and that there’s a desperate need for this push to find new ways. HOWEVER, when I read quotes like this, and the Jacques Ellul one that’s in a new post on Al’s blog, I also think to myself: “what’s so bad about tradition?” Or, in the context I work in, “kastom”. On the one hand, tradition can be mobilised to maintain power - there’s this term I love, coined ( think) by an anthropologist, Margaret Rodman - she uses the phrase to refer to the fact that kastom (custom/tradition) is not immutable, but a discourse that is mobilised by those with the power to do so, to the detriment of those that don’t. In the same way, “tradition” can be used in really negative ways, in abusive ways. HOWEVER, this isn’t to say that there aren’t really positive things about tradition and kastom either - in Melanesia, kastom is integrally linked to identity, it defines every aspect of life. In Vanuatu, the maintenance of the kastom economy has ensured that even those who are largely outside the cash economy can still send their kids to school, access health care etc. Similarly, we can’t let labels like “traditional”, “institutional” and “contemporary” obscure what’s REALLY going on - just because something’s traditional doesn’t mean it’s bad - things like communion and baptism being a case in point!!
I’m rambling…these conversations about institutional, traditional, and contemporary churches, structure, etc etc have really got me thinking. We need a new, and far more sophisticated vocabulary that enables us to get past the labels to the real problem beneath…
April 12th, 2007 at 11:52 am
Would someone like to explain to the Gay Christian contingent of this site why a supposedly socially progressive emerging church organisation like Forge is throwing its lot in with an ex-gay program like Liberty Ministries?
http://www.libertychristianministries.org.au/images/stories/docs/conference_280407.pdf
Or at the very LEAST why a pro gay-christian such as AVB or someone else will not be present to offer the opposite point of view to Simon Riches, whom believes no-one is born gay & whose personal testimony is that he had to make a decision to be Christian & NOT gay (but not both)?.
http://your.sydneyanglicans.net/sydneystories/self_destructive_life_ends_in_light/
I may be over-reacting due to shock, i never thought the Emergent movement would be so intellectually dishonest as to try this on without offering both points of view. I actually feel betrayed & offended.
ANY suggestion that a Gay Christian is not sexually whole or the result of abuse is presumptuous & offensive, make no mistake.
How could Emergents be so imbalanced in their approach to this issue?
How far has the apple really fallen from the tree? How far removed is the Emergent Church from its birth-roots of established denominations. Not too far we think. If Riches is a Sydney (Jensenite) Anglican i am even more shocked.
April 12th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Well Reve, not sure why you are saying FORGE is throwing their hat in with anything, can you explain that more? I do know the FORGE does offer people with different points of view on different things to have equal time. Does the emerging church have to define itself by a certain attitude about sexuality? There are differing opinions in secular scientific communitites surrounding the nature vs nurture debate, and it should not surprise that there will be differing opinions within Christianity as a whole or the emerging church. I think you saw in person that our group was not to fussed about the issue, others might be. The whole idea of emerging is that we are on a journey, not their yet and in the midst of a major paradigm shift.
Please do not be reactionary, and realize that their is very divergent ideas within the emerging church, and in FORGE itself.
rev
April 12th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
I wrote this in Word, then read the Rev’s response, which I think is a really good one - basically says what I was trying to say in far fewer words.
But here’s my verbose response anyway…
Reve, this is probably a more sensitive issue for you than for me, I’ll say that at the outset.
Deb Hirsch used to head up Exodus in Australia, and a lot of people in South Melbourne Restoration/Red Network have some experiences with these ministries. So I’m not surprised by these organisational linkages.
I used to be really negative about these sorts of ministries, but having a bit more life experience now (meaning, I know people who claim to have benefitted from them, and certainly appear to have), I’m a little more open-minded about these things. Of course, I’m straight, and this isn’t anywhere near as personal to me as it would be to you…but if you or I deserve to be taken at face value when we say we couldn’t possibly be attracted to men/women, then so do other people when they say they can exercise choice. That said, I still really struggle with these sorts of ministries, and while I know people who say they’ve benefited from them, I also know people who’ve been really messed up by these sorts of theologies. I’d really encourage you to chat to the people involved in these ministries - maybe Deb? - to find out where they’re coming from.
Also…I think there’s a blurring of issues here for a number of reasons:
Firstly, I think you’re confusing/conflating different theological issues. My understanding is that in the US, some of the most progressive churches on this issue (and I hate using the word ‘progressive’, but don’t want to use ‘liberal’ either!) are also very traditional, hierarchical, and very into their smells ‘n bells. The Rev might be able to confirm/disprove this?? I think we need to be wary of assuming that a theology about one thing - ie hierarchies or forms of worship - can be equated with views about another - ie sexuality.
Secondly, and related to the need to avoid confusing issues - being emergent doesn’t and shouldn’t mean taking a different stance to the established denominations on every single issue. To do so is to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The fact that many within the EC have a view of sexuality that is shared by many in established denominations doesn’t mean the EC lacks integrity. To suggest otherwise is to promote a reactionary approach to theology. Nobody would suggest that the fact that people in the EC believe Christ rose again demonstrates that the apple hasn’t fallen very far from the tree!
Thirdly - as the Rev points out, there is a diversity of thought within the EC just as there is within established denominations. The beautiful thing about the EC is that because it’s less hierarchical, it’s easier to see that diversity! Ie in the Catholic church, it’s often hard for ‘outsiders’ to see the diversity, as the media tends to focus on what someone with a “label”, ie the Pope, says; while in the EC, leadership is a bit less defined and a bit more fluid, and it’s easier to see the diversity of thought.
Despite everything I’ve said above, I sympathise with your sense of surprise, because I experienced it myself.
April 12th, 2007 at 12:39 pm
I guess where i’m coming from is that (as i understand it, & correct me if i’m misinformed) : The Hirsches are the founders & unofficial figure-heads of Forge (publishing & speaking identities). Mrs Hirsch is also a figurehead of Purple Heart Ministries, which is where Mr Riches also originally came from & from what i can tell the two ministries (Purple Heart & Liberty) share the same ideology towards “the Gay lifestyle”. Certainly the fact that they are sharing a platform at this conference on the same subject would imply similarities. I may be hasty in identifying Forge with this conference, but you can understand the linear progress of my thinking can’t you?
It also worries me this whole concept of “unwanted” same-sex attraction with Mrs Hirsch & Mr Riches ready to deliver people of it. No young gay person (male or female) WANTS to be gay initially, internalised homophobia perpetuated by outside society ensures this. It’s a journey to self-acceptance & acknowledgement of design & destiny. That’s how you really help someone.
But yes, forget that i said “Forge” & let’s just accept that a degree of the most visible parts of the Emerging Church community in NSW & VIC are not as socially progresive as they would like to think they are & are not the safe places & alternatives, the utopia, that gay people thought they’d be.
I do not doubt you or your church at all, Rev, having visited & experienced it directly.
April 12th, 2007 at 12:54 pm
No, again I don’t think you understand completely what is going on here. Deb is very accepting, and loving towards those from all sexual backgrounds. Much more so than I, as I tend to struggle with the transgender crowd, though I am working as hard as I can my natural reaction is one of difficulty (being completely honest here). She does believe that biblically the proper response to same sex attraction is celibacy. She also believes that some people can actually through healing of early wounds live in a different manner, as this has been her experience and the experience of others. She also knows that this is not always the case and believes that it is within the church to love and support people no matter where they are in their own beliefs. Do not be so quick to judge her as the same, she is far from it. And spending any time with her at all will show you that. She shares life with celibate, promiscious, and covenant relationship gay people, trans gender people, and sexually broken hetero people as well.
You may not share her theology on sexuality, but to think that gays would not be safe at her church, or any church where she has been allowed to speak to is simply not true. She actually really pushes people into a challenging position with all of her talks.
Please email me if you want to get into this more as there are some things that I am not sure if it is okay to share publicly.
rev
April 12th, 2007 at 1:01 pm
Correct me if I am wrong but this conversation took a strange turn from comment 8 onwards where all of a sudden it focussed on homosexuality. Am I missing something obvious? Isn’t this meant to be a discussion about the quote?
So… about the quote and the comments 1-7 what suprised me wa sthat under the surface there seems to be some belief that if we get structures right then prophets will emerge! How modernist can one get?
You know what I think? Make the structures suck and make them counter to the mission of God and prophets will emerge. Look at South Africa or 1950/60’s Southern US States or 1930/40’s German confessing church. That’s the context of the likes ot Tutu, Bonhoeffer & Luther-King.
April 12th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
My apologies Andrew….
Rev i will email you soon & i will email Debra at some stage too for clarification (to be honest though, Simon Riches is a greater concern to me).
Thanks for listening to my rant.
April 12th, 2007 at 1:12 pm
Reve - yeah, I understood the connection you made, and I share your concerns - but I reckon you’d have a good chat to Deb about it. At the very least it would be an interesting chat.
Your post raises a really interesting issue though: I agree, no young person wants to be gay initially, due to internalised homophobia. But for those that think the Bible says that it’s wrong to be a practising homosexual, how do you balance this with the need to support others in their journey to self-acceptance, or indeed achieve self-acceptance yourself? How can we stay true to our theological convictions yet also achieve self-acceptance we feel our very make-up is counter to those theological convictions? We can find parallels with attitudes to abortion - if X believes abortion is wrong, suppporting Y, who’s having one, isn’t always going to be that easy. Or drug use - my Christian friends have varying views on drug use (and I include everything from cigarettes and alcohol to pot to coke here) - how do I balance my very strong feelings about drug use with the need to provide a safe place? We all struggle with these questions all the time, and it not only can be done, but HAS to be done, but that old cliche about “love the sinner and hate the sin” isn’t as easy to apply as it is to rattle off.
Also…this whole idea of “deliverance”…while I have BIG question marks over it, we obviously need to be wary of even SUGGESTING that every gay person has a similar story to the next - and by dismissing the idea of “deliverance” out of hand, that’s what we do. There’s a world of difference between the 18 year old woman who’s always felt “different” and who feels sick at the thought of kissing a guy; and the 40 year old bloke who was abused as a kid, who’s in love with and attracted to his wife, who has several young kids, and who for reasons he can’t quite explain is taking expensive detours through St Kilda on Sunday nights. Those two stories are completely different, and the experiences those two individuals might have of these ministries might be completely different.
April 12th, 2007 at 1:15 pm
Nahhh, I think Reve’s comment was highly relevant…he was suggesting that some parts of the EC aren’t forging new paths. Right, Reve?
:D
(joke, in case anyone missed it )
April 12th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
I was really suprised too by this Forge connection…if Deb used to head up Exodus, there are a lot of people who have been really, badly hurt by that organisation, which as far as I can see has done a lot of damage.
April 12th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
It has done a lot of good as well, for some people. Ultimately they left Exodus however. It is a very difficult issue, and I think what happened is that in the fervency of new conversion, and a growing movement things jumped a head in naiveity and as things grew things changed. I can tell you that of all the people I have heard speak about the subject of sexuality, but gay and straight, no one has had as compassionate, and well put together understanding as Deb. I might go a bit further than her in my theology, and so would Phil and Dan, but as to her compassion, and acceptance, she puts me to shame.
rev
April 12th, 2007 at 2:14 pm
And not all people who feel same sex attractions are gay, will ever be gay or shuld ieven be considered gay. I avhe infact faound that a signigficant number of gay men are quite biogoted on this issue - the thinking is that if you are attracted to men and your are a man then you are gay full stop - no points along the continuum of sexuality- black or white - and yet when they are referred to in black and white langauge they get all upset and call suggest people are not being honest or lack integrity.
This is not so - I no many many men who avhe had and enjoyed sex with other men and are not Gay have never considered themselves gay and would be horrified to be though of as gay. I also no many fop these men who ahve struggled with these attadctions and have not wanted them - therefore the term unwanted same sex attraction holds validity in my mind
April 12th, 2007 at 2:14 pm
here here, Rev.
April 12th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
one of these days I will edit in word before posting and themn my spelling and typing will be perfect like Bec’s
April 12th, 2007 at 2:19 pm
Yep, I agree with that too, Greg.
You’ve reminded me of all the conversations I’ve had with radical feminist lesbians, who told me I wasn’t a “real” feminist since I’m straight - so unbelievably bigoted and narrow-minded. Everyone’s sexuality is different, and while I do agree that groups like Exodus can cause a lot of harm, like the Rev I’ve also seen a lot of good come out of them. I don’t see this as a black and white issue - and if I’ve got a friend who wants to be a part of Exodus, and wants to be “straight”, they *are* entitled to that choice (that’s not to say that I wouldn’t be interested in the reasoning and drivers behind that choice).
April 12th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
Greg…it’s called me trying to read things properly before I respond to them, and endeavouring to write considered responses.
April 12th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
lawyers :o)
April 12th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
:laugh:
April 12th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
Greg i do understand that situational / circumstantial homosexuality is a different animal. But boy oh boy, you would want to be absolutely sure that that that’s what it was (& not self-hatred) before getting (”helping”) someone to deny their sexual feelings.
Here’s the thing, God dosen’t make mistakes, if same-sex attraction has touched on someone’s life (not forced on them by someone else) there is a reason for that & we cannot say otherwise without being arrogant.
Yes?
And if you agree that God does not make mistakes & we lead young people away from God-created sexuality & the path He set for them, then we can be accused of leading that young person astray.
And ppl who lead God’s children astray - well, it would be better they get millstones tied around their necks & flung in the deepest oceans. Isn’t that the verse?
Could you honestly say that you know the difference between someone who is repressed & self-hating & a genuine gay? And should you try to help or inluence that person until you do know? Say that person was vulnerable & would do whatever you told them to?
Can you see the responsibility there?
April 12th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Should be ” repressed & self-hating & a confused straight person”.
Apolz.
April 12th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
no email yet, I am becoming a confused self hating repressed straight person.
Except for the confused, self hating repressed part.
rev
April 12th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
Re the emerging church, ‘the exgay’ ministries, the issue of homosexuality and the church……..what this space.
things are happening behind the scenes…….all will be revealed…….it wont happen overnight…..and other cliches.
We will not go down the horrific path of US christianity which has made gay bashing an art form and presented in terms of upholding righteousness.
We have already bypassed some of the debate……thank God.
Anthony Venn-Brown
http://www.anthonyvennbrown.com/book.html
April 12th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
Could you honestly say that you know the difference between someone who is repressed & self-hating & a genuine gay?
No I couldn’t tell the difference. I am only ever suggesting that an individual focus o thier own sexuality and not another persons - my point on the continuum is related only to me and my experience, not anothers