quote:

---

He has shown you, O man, what is good;
And what does the Lord require of you
But to do justly,
To love mercy,
And to walk humbly with your God?

---

quote:

---

I've come to the conclusion that the "latest move of God" is to visit a lonely elderly person, or befriend someone who is mentally ill, or to work for a just deal for the homeless or just for average citizens. It does involve spirituality as well. You know, all the boring stuff, like prayer, for example...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Never heard such a phrase. Is it an evangelical-only buzz word?

---

Yes. Specifically, a charismatic/evangelical buzzword. And if I never hear the bloody phrase again before heaven, I will be a happy bunny.

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
I've come to the conclusion that the "latest move of God" is to visit a lonely elderly person, or befriend someone who is mentally ill, or to work for a just deal for the homeless or just for average citizens. It does involve spirituality as well. You know, all the boring stuff, like prayer, for example...

But I guess all that stuff is not very exciting is it? Not much to shout about in a media obsessed age. It doesn't really attract the big bucks. Ah well...

---

Damn straight, EE.

I am not cynical about the Third Person of the Trinity, or His power. But the Spirit is far more to be found in service and humility than He is in the Next Big Hype That Promises Much And Doesn't Deliver All That Much.
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

I've come to the conclusion that the "latest move of God" is to visit a lonely elderly person, or befriend someone who is mentally ill, or to work for a just deal for the homeless or just for average citizens. It does involve spirituality as well. You know, all the boring stuff, like prayer, for example...

---

fwiw, there ARE evangelical/ charismatic churches (as well as non-charismatic/ evangelical churches) who do speak about and understand the Spirit moving in precisely the ways that you mention here. It just isn't as easy to mock/ critique as, you know, the flashy stuff like snake handling
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
EE, I suspect you weren't expecting this, but I agree with every word you've typed ...


 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 
There's talk (with maybe just a sprinkle of wishful thinking...) in simple / emerging / organic church circles of a paradigm shift in Christianity, towards a more grassroots and locally incarnated expression of Christianity. I've even read it being suggested as part of a cycle of reformation / reinvention that allegedly happens every 500 years or so. I'll try and remember to dig out the quote this evening.

I do think there might be something significant in this; after all, there are plenty of people experimenting with and writing about non-standard ways of being church. Or it might all fizzle out, with some elements simply being taken on board by the more mainstream, traditional strands of Christianity. Who knows?
 

---

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Never heard such a phrase. Is it an evangelical-only buzz word?

---

quote:

---

originally posted by Gamaliel:
Recently I heard of a rather worrying trend towards Russian Orthodox biker gangs in the former Soviet Union ... they like all the trappings but mix it with xenophobia, anti-semitism and extreme nationalism.

---

Bikers like beards and wearing black. Extreme nationalism would be a problem for Russian biker gangs. American biker gangs ride Harley Davidsons because Harleys are made in the USA. What comparable Russian motercycle is available to Russian gangs?
 

---

Posted by The Rhythm Methodist (# 17064) on :
 
I want to get in quickly, so I can agree with both EE and Gamaliel......who knows if there'll ever be another opportunity?
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
I've no idea what bikes they ride. I wouldn't be surprised if they import Harleys and still bang on and on about the demonic and degenerate West ...



Meanwhile, a second post from EE where I agree with everything he says. Is this a record?

I must admit I'm rather pleased. Not because I have an over-active sense of the rightness of my own position, simply because I'm glad to be on the same page as him.

I sometimes entertain dark thoughts about where all this sort of thing could lead - but I remember what Andrew Walker observed to Tom Smail in a transcript of a three-way conversation with Smail and Nigel Wright at the end of their 1995 book, 'Charismatic Renewal: The search for a theology'.

In a transcript of this conversation, entitled 'From the Toronto Blessing to Trinitarian Renewal' they all three agree that 'health lies' in a proper understanding of the Trinity - ie. you can't have the Spirit without the Son, you can't have the Son and the Spirit without the Father - and so on.

The Spirit of God isn't some kind of impersonal 'power-force' with which we zap our way through life.

Towards the end of the conversation, Walker says to Tom Smail, 'I want to support your optimism, because I believe in God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.'

He goes on to say that its not a question of making 'dire predictions' but of 'being responsible as theological teachers'. As long as the gospel is preached, then things have a tendency to turn round and remain on track.

I s'pose it depends on how optimistic we allow ourselves to be.

That said, Walker does identify areas of grave concern, particular some of the health-wealth and 'kingdom now' emphases that EE has also picked up on here.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
@The Rhythm Methodist. I am sure there will be other opportunities.

The new, reformed Gamaliel will endeavour to show more grace whether he agrees or disagrees with EE. There have been occasions in the past when I've agreed with EE but through a combination of circumstances - including my rather convoluted posting style at times - we've ended up in an unhelpful spiral that has headed Hellwards.

I trust this will no longer happen as I think I recognise the danger signs better now. And the fault has been far more on my side than on his.
 

---

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :
 
Originally posted by Gamaliel:

quote:

---

Meanwhile, a second post from EE where I agree with everything he says. Is this a record?

I must admit I'm rather pleased. Not because I have an over-active sense of the rightness of my own position, simply because I'm glad to be on the same page as him.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
What next?! You'll be telling me that the leadership of the EDL is sitting down with Muslims!

---

LOL - you bad monkey, Martin

God's "next big move" sounds like the Lord has been suffering Divine Constipation for some millennia. One would not want to be around for the outcome.
 

---

Posted by HughWillRidmee (# 15614) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I've no idea what bikes they ride. I wouldn't be surprised if they import Harleys and still bang on and on about the demonic and degenerate West ...

---

quote:

---

'[T]here are some common characteristics that mark off the early phase of dynamic social movements that are distinct from the social structures of the latter institutions that arise from them.

This is as true of the church and other Christian agencies as it is of corporations, community projects, political parties, and other social movements. Whether it be a denomination, parachurch agency, or local church plant - all are launched with a certain ethos and energy that starts with a seminal vision or idea and swells like a wave to impact society round about it.'

---

It goes on to talk about 'sigmoid growth' (see e.g. here) and how 'The goal of churches should be to achieve what strategists call "sigmoid growth", which is the capacity to constantly remain in a state of movement-like growth.'

There's more good stuff, I think, but that's probably enough already. It's taken from The Shaping of Things to Come.
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Never heard such a phrase. Is it an evangelical-only buzz word?

---

You've never read The Secular City by Harvey Cox?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
From memory - didn't Peppone ride an Indian?

---

I love you so much for posting this.

When I first became a Christian it was in a church that used the language identified in the OP all the time, often in casual and unspecified ways. Over the years I've become a bit cynical in the ways specified in the OP.

And yet... in the area of the UK I live in, I can see grand things happening. Churches of ALL denominations (not the traditional lot bundling together and the evangelical/ enthusiastic lot working seperately) working together to serve the poorest and most vulnerable in their cities. Churches partnering with secular agencies to help combat poverty.

It's good stuff. It's humans helping other humans with the help of the Holy Spirit. And it's the only sort of activity I've ever seen in churches that I could honestly say looks like a "move of God".

[ 09. October 2013, 11:03: Message edited by: Earwig ]
 

---

Posted by Cedd007 (# 16180) on :
 
The difficulty of issues like this is we can end up over-analysing, and then lampooning, something which we can all agree is bad, and then replacing it with a cliché we can all agree with – a Lowest Common Denominator which gives us all a warm fuzzy feeling. We can then miss out on what's weird but nevertheless works, as it were, things which can be unclassifiable, disturbing, but quite possibly the work of God.

Phrases like "the current move of God", "the latest move of God", "the next move of God", or "we wanna be involved with what God is doing at the moment", at their worst, could simply be someone implying they are 'Superior Christians' by showing off the special knowledge they believe they have. Sadly, this happens. However, read, say, the biographies of someone like Hudson Taylor or Saint Ignatius Loyola, and similar kinds of phrases appear I wouldn't want to question too deeply.

The same I think applies to territorial spirits. Christian friends I know and trust do sense spiritual disturbance in particular roads or houses as they go prayer-walking. I knew a bishop, now retired, when he was an undergraduate. In spite of being about the sanest, soundest, human being I know, he happened to believe that different places had their different spirits – I can't recall the exact vocabulary, but something like that.

With regard to God moving into particular territory, how can one read the Book of Acts without getting a feeling of God's geography? Or what are we to make of some of our Saviour's instructions about where to go and in what order?

The reverse side of using a phrase like "the current move of God" is using it because you have a real, God-given, gift of discernment. So we need I think to test each spirit, on a case by case basis, although this may not be easy if we have been fooled or exploited by the use of these phrases.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
I suspect, in typical Gamaliel fashion, that there's an element of both/and rather than either/or in some of this.

The whole idea of movements and groups developing and going through pioneering and settling phases and so on isn't new. Everyone agrees on that. I remember an RC priest observing to me that religious orders in the RC Church tend to have a 'floruit' or effective life-span of around 600 years at most.

He suggested that the similar timescale for a standard Protestant denomination - say the Methodists - would be about 200 - 300 years and for what he regarded as 'garage churches' the life-span was the effective working life of the main leader.

I think he's broadly on the button.

Meanwhile, seed-time and harvest, night and day, the seasons and the cycles go on very much as before.

There are parallel notions in mystical settings - Yeats with his 'gyres' and so on.

Things come and go. Things change. The writer of Ecclesiastes noticed all of that millenia ago.

God's involved with all of it.

I don't see how he is any the less involved during periods of relative stability as he is when there are times of flux and change. God is still God. 'I the Lord do not change.'
 

---

Posted by SusanDoris (# 12618) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Earwig:
It's good stuff. It's humans helping other humans with the help of the Holy Spirit. And it's the only sort of activity I've ever seen in churches that I could honestly say looks like a "move of God".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SusanDoris
...as I am at present benefiting from a daily visit from a carer to helpp in my post-op recovery...

---

I wish you all the best in your recovery.

I nearly wrote "I wish you every blessing...", but maybe that's not the best word, given your viewpoint, but I wish you that anyway!

As for God working through people, or people just doing it all themselves, well... I think - or hope - that we can both agree that there are huge mysteries to the universe, and who knows what is really going on "behind the scenes" to motivate people? You have your evolutionary understanding of human kindness; I see it rather differently. But I think we can both agree that kindness is what the world desperately needs (and I am not always the best practitioner of it, unfortunately !).
 

---

Posted by Laurelin (# 17211) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cedd007:
... However, read, say, the biographies of someone like Hudson Taylor or Saint Ignatius Loyola, and similar kinds of phrases appear I wouldn't want to question too deeply.

---

Bingo. Likewise St Francis. And the Desert Fathers. And the Wesleys. And ... well, we could go on.

Up-thread, I made typically Ship-like disgusted noises about the clichéd language. But I am not at all cynical about the Holy Spirit or what may in fact be a genuine move of God. Not one bit. We humans say and do all sorts of silly things, including the best and most 'anointed' of us, but God is God, and ... He is always working. Sometimes, yes, in a movement of radical renewal, a movement that shakes up the Church. But also quietly and unobtrusively ... in the lives of people simply getting on and serving others because they love Christ and love other people too.

And many of the 'charismatic' saints who were - and are - much used by God were (and are) pretty eccentric, it seems to me, just a little bit whacky. Like Hildegard of Bingen ...

SusanDoris, I hope you are recovering well after your op.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
A wise vicar once told me that he thought that both charismatics and 'contemplatives' end up in the same place only by different routes.

I think that's right.
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
It all seems to be based on a rather anthropomorphic view of God, which denies his omnipresence. God is "doing something" in such and such a place, with the implication that this is his special work for this year or this whatever period of time you wish to choose.

Even at my most charismatically flakiest, I felt rather troubled by this kind of talk. I reasoned that surely God is active everywhere in different ways, but consistent with his nature.

We used to have "strategic" prayer meetings, in which "this coming year will be the year of such-and-such in the plans of God" and then we'll move on to the next phase of "what God is doing..." Or we would 'strategically' pray for church leaders, councillors etc, with the insinuation that ordinary people were not worth praying for, because that would be a waste of good prayer, and we only have a limited stock of the stuff, so mustn't waste it on the riffraff (that was never said of course - perish the thought! - but it seemed to be the logical implication of our emphasis at times).

This is all about trying to control God. It almost smacks of the occult.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

It's a power and authority theology, rooted in "kingdom now" I suppose, often with the themes of warfare and (spiritual) violence emphasised. The whole "March for Jesus" phenomenon fed (or rather feeds) into this, where people were bored of ordinary worship, so had to take acts of charismatic worship out onto the streets as a weapon to wield against the powers of evil - the strongholds, which if broken would release revival into the towns and cities of our benighted nation. God is likened to a warrior on the move - or on the march, to be more exact. Nothing about love your neighbour in the Good Samaritan sense, and everything about passing by (or marching by) on the other side, treating people as merely candidates for the anticipated power zap, where God will magically do all the Samaritan dirty work which 'we' have facilitated by our great spirituality.

---

quote:

---

, “when we refuse to benefit from another culture’s (or our own) slave labor, and when we come against governments that systemically oppress the masses… when we expose and confront the many subtle forms of structural hatred that presently choke our own culture, whether in the form of systemic prejudice, institutional injustice, or the demonization of other peoples in the name of nationalism, we participate with God in the same spiritual battle that has been going on since the dawn of history.”

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Earwig:

quote:

---

Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
From memory - didn't Peppone ride an Indian?

---

I love you so much for posting this.

When I first became a Christian it was in a church that used the language identified in the OP all the time, often in casual and unspecified ways. Over the years I've become a bit cynical in the ways specified in the OP.

And yet... in the area of the UK I live in, I can see grand things happening. Churches of ALL denominations (not the traditional lot bundling together and the evangelical/ enthusiastic lot working seperately) working together to serve the poorest and most vulnerable in their cities. Churches partnering with secular agencies to help combat poverty.

It's good stuff. It's humans helping other humans with the help of the Holy Spirit. And it's the only sort of activity I've ever seen in churches that I could honestly say looks like a "move of God".

---

Thank you

Whilst I too admire the many people who are doing what they can to help others I can find* no reason to think that having a social conscience requires the involvement of anything extra-human.

*despite still searching - albeit in an occasionally somewhat idiosyncratic way!

SusanDoris good to have you back.
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 
On that chatter in the emerging church about a new paradigm of church being on the way, I just read this. It's a rather bold claim, I grant you, but I think it nicely illustrates what I've read in several different places about new ways of being church.
 

---

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by HughWillRidmee
Whilst I too admire the many people who are doing what they can to help others I can find* no reason to think that having a social conscience requires the involvement of anything extra-human.

*despite still searching - albeit in an occasionally somewhat idiosyncratic way!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by HughWillRidmee
Whilst I too admire the many people who are doing what they can to help others I can find* no reason to think that having a social conscience requires the involvement of anything extra-human.

*despite still searching - albeit in an occasionally somewhat idiosyncratic way!

---

On this subject, there's an interesting BBC article
here.

It probably won't surprise you that I tend to think that the problems in explaining altruism come down to a world view error, which the article does not consider. It is assumed that a particular view of reality is correct, and no phenomenon can be allowed to challenge its assumptions. I find that very strange, to say the least!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
On that chatter in the emerging church about a new paradigm of church being on the way, I just read this. It's a rather bold claim, I grant you, but I think it nicely illustrates what I've read in several different places about new ways of being church.

---

I've been hearing about this kind of thing from the emergent/emerging/whatever crowd for the past ten years. I confess that I often find their way of talking about things ... pretentious.

And kind of wishy-washy. For my particular personality type, that is infuriating. And my particular personality type likes boundaries. Boundaries. Don't knock 'em. They matter. Really, they do.

Before I sound too cynical - I'm not, overall - I do think there is a grassroots movement like this happening. And lots of good things happening too, e.g. Christians offering to pray for people at New Age festivals. That is a positive, Christ-centred engagement with the prevailing culture.

But many of the same things that bedevil 'traditional' church will, I think, be the same things that bedevil 'church in a circle' or whatever. Not least the fact that there is always a bigger need than manpower (and womanpower) to help meet it.

Human nature, innit?
 

---

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by HughWillRidmee
I didn't get the assumption you see, nor know what phenomenon/phenomena you are referring to - probably I need you to be more explicit.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
@South Coast Kevin - I know I keep coming back to this and I know it's not what you're trying to say, but I keep coming back to this issue of why we should assume that 'new ways' of being church are going to somehow be better than old ways ...

I'm not saying that the reverse is true, that new ways are inevitably going to be worse ...

But what I don't understand is why there's this assumption that new = better and somehow more empowering and that old = bad.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
As an Anglican youth, I was taught not to put the surplice on until after the candles were lighted, and remove it before extinguishing the candles... No explanation was ever really provided as a youth, and I suspect that its origin was merely a practical one, such as keeping wax or soot off the pristine surplices.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurelin:
But many of the same things that bedevil 'traditional' church will, I think, be the same things that bedevil 'church in a circle' or whatever. Not least the fact that there is always a bigger need than manpower (and womanpower) to help meet it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Sure, there's a balance in all of this, South Coast Kevin. Lots of things that have become ritualised over the years had a practical basis ... the Orthodox priests I know are all fully aware of that but this doesn't stop them doing it. Whether they explain the significance to their congregations is a moot point though ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

If we don't believe in 'the next big move of God', and we clearly don't, then a North African future seems to be fairly likely.

---

As we say in the US,
"What do you mean 'we' kimosabe?"

I won't try and speak for everyone else, but for myself, the fact that we have identified concerns with chasing after the next new thing, lack of critical discernment, or a superficial spirituality that won't go the distance, does not mean I've given up on "the next big move of God". There's still a lot of "Aunt Nells" out there, and the Spirit is still moving in and through them.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
I meant pretty much the same only with lower numbers.

Of course, the pace of change can and does increase. But 30 years ago, as a full-on charismatic evangelical, I was seriously expecting the UK Christian landscape to look completely different by now. If you'd have asked me, I'd have probably said that most fervent and serious Christians would have left the denominations by the end of the 20th century and formed lively, vibrant 'new churches' and that we'd have seen some kind of widespread revival.

That hasn't happened.

I think we could see the UK become like North Africa apart from the major urban centres where Christianity will largely be a migrant/ethnic minority thing. I fully expect it to have largely died out in some rural and semi-rural areas.

Less than 10% of people go to church in my small Cheshire town and the vast majority of those that do are probably 50+.

I don't expect - barring some major revival or reversal in trends - for there to be that many attending churches here in 10, 20, 30 or 40 years time. I fully expect the Methodists to have disappeared by 2050, with a small handful left as early as 2030.

So you've misunderstand the point I was making - mainly because I don't think I made it very clearly.

When I said that things would be pretty much as they are now, I meant pretty much the same rate of decline. I don't expect that decline to be quite so precipitous as it has been - the CofE lost a third of its active members during the 1960s if I remember the figures correctly.

But I don't expect to see a resurgence of faith on any major scale. I would expect to see Christians and churches around in 2053 if it were possible for me to live that long, but there'll only be the faintest traces of Christendom in the West.



Yes, there'll still be Great Aunt Nell's and so on but 'full many a flower is born to blush unseen/And waste its fragrance on the desert air.'

I think Pentecostalism and its charismatic cousins may yet surprise us, but equally I suspect that the cults, sects and wierd groups of the future are being incubated in the charismatic soil of today.
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think we could see the UK become like North Africa apart from the major urban centres where Christianity will largely be a migrant/ethnic minority thing. I fully expect it to have largely died out in some rural and semi-rural areas.

Less than 10% of people go to church in my small Cheshire town and the vast majority of those that do are probably 50+.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Far more people than 10% claim some kind of affiliation with Christianity. For whatever reason (and there are many different ones, no doubt), only a small proportion of people who say they are Christian actually show up in the church attendance stats. [...]

I wonder also if there are plenty of people meeting up in more informal ways to do Christian sort of things who won't show up in any standard church attendance surveys. Some of these people will call their group a church (even though most others might not recognise it as such), but I'm sure there must be others who meet maybe in fairly ad hoc, sporadic fashion, but still to talk about faith and spirituality issues, and maybe to pray.

This is why I think there's such potential in the simple / organic church movement. Many people consider themselves religious / spiritual in a Christian sense but don't attend church in its traditional institutional forms. From what I gather (mostly through reading but also a bit of personal experience), plenty of these people are up for Christian-type meetings and activities, just without the institutional stuff.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
The assumption is the belief that everything in human nature should be explained in entirely materialistic / naturalistic / biological / neurological terms. There is no reason why this should be the case, unless you want to make a case for strong (or 'naive') empiricism, which is wholly inadequate to explain even the validity of the scientific method itself (based, as it is, on certain non-empirical assumptions, such as the uniformity of nature).

The phenomenon I was referring to was altruism. The difficulties of making altruism fit into a naturalistic paradigm could indicate that it cannot fit into that paradigm. And if this is the case, then what is needed is a different paradigm. The same goes for mind, reason, and consciousness.

A naturalistic explanation is simply that. It is not necessarily a proof.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Could we see a growth in some kind of modern monastic contemplative tradition? A deep disillusionment with institutional Christianity and the overbearing "relationship and intimacy" paradigm of the new churches could encourage a more individualistic spirituality, which is, however, connected with the historic roots of the church in the UK.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
But the problem is that all churches, of whatever type, need committed people to set them up, host them and deal with the intensity that comes from being involved in other people's lives and attempting to move beyond lay passivity. Where are these committed people going to come from?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Maybe there are people who left Sunday School or last had an RE lesson 20-30 years ago who are now weary of private faith and are quietly setting up vaguely church-like gatherings without any connections to anything official. That would be very interesting. But I haven't heard of anything like that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
On the institutional/non-institutional thing, I can see that there is a suspicion of institutional Christianity but it appears to have escaped South Coast Kevin's notice that his church is also 'institutional' to a certain extent.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

Could we see a growth in some kind of modern monastic contemplative tradition? A deep disillusionment with institutional Christianity and the overbearing "relationship and intimacy" paradigm of the new churches could encourage a more individualistic spirituality, which is, however, connected with the historic roots of the church in the UK. I think many British people - perhaps most - rather like the idea of there existing traditional church buildings and spaces dotting the landscape and breaking up the monotony of housing and industrial estates and shopping centres, even if they don't want anything to do with the workings of the church. Christian spirituality is needed as a valued resource in a secular society.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
The main personal experience I'm drawing on is of people who've come to follow Christ through the debt counselling centre my church runs. It's run on an explicitly Christian basis so the advisers ask about the clients' faith and if they'd like prayer for anything.

[...]Plenty of people have become Christians through the work. Some have fully integrated into a church community, while for others that's taking some time. For some people in the latter group, a homegroup or prayer partner kind of set-up have enabled them to connect with other Christians even though they're very cautious towards institutional Christianity. They are drawn to Jesus while remaining wary of the (institutional) church.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
What I'm less convinced of, though, is the ability of groups of this kind to sustain themselves or the faith for any great length of time. What checks and balances are there?

What's to stop these groups hiving off into total heresy?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:


Meanwhile, @SvitlanaV2 ... yes, monastic vocations are in decline. However, one could argue that the growth of neo-monastic movements - the Northumbria Community and so on - does offer some kind of continuation or parallel impetus.

I think it's been observed before that groups of this kind tend to attract middle-class, chatty types.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:


People have given the simple/organic approach a go. Many times. Many of what we know as denominations today started out like that. The Quakers, the Methodists (essentially a grassroots pietistic movement within the CofE) and many others.

Of course it's been tried. It's been tried many, many times over the years.

---

quote:

---

I don't believe that Emerging Church is in any way more culturally neutral than any other kind of church.

---

quote:

---

On your heresy point, I would suggest that the authors of the books you're looking at can only write the way they do precisely because they are steeped in the older and more formal traditions. They need the insights and deposit from the older churches and denominations to provide ballast.

---

quote:

---

It seems axiomatic to me that newer, more apparently organic groups of the kind you are advocating are inevitably going to be more prone to heresy unless they are somehow plugged in - via study, learning, relationships etc - into the wider scene.

---

quote:

---

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Prescilla and Aquila had to take Apollos aside in order to 'teach him the word of God more accurately.'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel
If we simply focussed on what there was to do at hand and not worry about this, that or the other 'next move' and so on then I think a lot more could be achieved.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:


Nobody's saying that the historic and more formally institutional churches are 'right' and that anything else is 'wrong' - at least, I'm not.

Rather, what I am saying is that we need that ballast, the wisdom and the insights that they carry.

---

quote:

---

Many evangelicals [...] went clearly off-piste and off-beam during the 1970s with all manner of strange, wacky and even dangerous teachings.

---

quote:

---

What I'm interested in is historic, creedal Christianity of the form that many, if not most, of us on this thread would sign up to.

---

quote:

---

My concern for the organic forms of church is that they would drift from this 'dogmatic core.' I think we can see that with peripheral groups of various kinds. It's certainly happened in plenty of developing countries.

---

Perhaps the next big move of God is to hasten the death of the 'dogmatic core'.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
Well, yes EE, I don't doubt that God is 'there' in someway with this bloke even amidst the stale pee and grimness of the situation.

If the Orthodox are right and God is 'present everywhere and fillest all things,' then surely we can expect to become aware of signs and tokens of his presence in all manner of circumstances and places - even in the Elim services ...



As well as everywhere and anywhere else.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
I think you've misunderstood my point, SvitlanaV2.

The reason the Chinese house-churches got going was because the authorities effectively closed down or else took over the mainstream churches.

Which is all very well and good - provided that we take into account that some of these independent or underground churches developed some pretty loopy views - and not just from the standpoint of the 'dogmatic core' as I've called it.

At the extremes, there were people who drowned because they believed they would be able to walk on water as Jesus did.

If you want to chuck out the 'dogmatic core' then that's up to you. See where it'll get you.

Sure, I fully accept that plenty of mainstream clergy don't sign up to the historic creeds and so on but as Andrew Walker the sociologist observes, because those creeds are there and embedded into the liturgy and so on, at least there remains the opportunity for people to engage with the truths which they convey.

Ok, I know I could be accused of putting these doctrines on a pedestal but I'm afraid I'm convinced that the path to a balanced, healthy Christian spirituality is through an understanding of God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit according to these ancient creeds and formularies.

Of course, that's not to say that a house-church can't explore Ignatian spirituality if it so wished or that people have to belong to Anglican, RC or Orthodox churches - I've never said anything of that kind.

I know you've had bitter experience of a mainstream denomination apparently collapsing all around you - and I do sympathise with that. I don't know what the answer is for you in your particular situation nor would I be so presumptious as to suggest one.

All I am saying - based on my own observations - is that as understandable and attractive as a DIY let's-all-hang-out-and-be-organic approach sounds, the reality may not live up to the rhetoric.
 

---

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:

All I am saying - based on my own observations - is that as understandable and attractive as a DIY let's-all-hang-out-and-be-organic approach sounds, the reality may not live up to the rhetoric.

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0