Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
A church with the long view would ... should be constantly going to work, live, be where the fields are white for harvest from its middle class heights. Incarnate divested from its otherwise helpless useless privilege.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Yes, it's funny, but one doesn't tend to think of Baptists as 'posh', even though they've historically been higher up the social ladder than some of the other Nonconformists.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Historically I think that Wesleyans were much higher up the social scale than Primitives or Bible Christians

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I know all about the decline, Martin60; the last church I was seriously emotionally invested in closed. But relying on middle class Anglicans probably isn't the answer.

---

quote:

---

Some of the African Pentecostals have talked about 'reverse mission'. We should probably encourage and supported them to develop this idea. They could be just as incarnational as any lefty Oxbridge vicar if that's where an unfolding theology takes them!

---

quote:

---

A missionary approach to church planting in difficult areas could take the small number of new converts made and train and release them to evangelise among their friends and neighbours, rather than assuming that a university trained evangelist from elsewhere is going to have to dominate the work for fifteen years. After all, who has the zeal of a new convert if not the new convert? Who's going to feel the most comfortable in such an area, with such people?

---

quote:

---

Moreover, the CofE (among others) isn't routinely training its clergy in evangelism, AFAIUI, so leaving it all up to them doesn't make a lot of sense. Their focus tends to be pastoral, which is good, but that alone doesn't grow churches. You'd need a different approach, different kinds of candidates for the work, different training....

---

quote:

---

And again: congregations. If church growth and conversions are a serious matter and not just a hoped-for side effect of community-minded action then there needs to be much more intentional, focused prayer, education and congregational commitment.

---

quote:

---

For example, if we're talking about evangelism in areas with lots of Muslims, then there has to be a really serious awareness of and engagement with the challenges involved in that. New converts would need much more support. Some would literally need a new family, not just coffee and biscuits on Sunday after service. It's very rare to find a church willing to commit to so much work.

---

quote:

---

Actually, first things first: I don't think there's a sufficiently clear foundational theology about evangelism in mainstream churches. We know that members want their churches to grow rather than decline and close (and the suspicion is that selfish reasons are high up the list), but there's a longstanding anxiety about sharing the gospel yet no clear understanding about why and how to do so.

---

quote:

---

To return to the OP, one could say that criticism of the prosperity gospel is simply a diversionary tactic; that's not where our real problems lie.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I don't think there's a sufficiently clear foundational theology about evangelism in mainstream churches. We know that members want their churches to grow rather than decline and close (and the suspicion is that selfish reasons are high up the list), but there's a longstanding anxiety about sharing the gospel yet no clear understanding about why and how to do so.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I don't think there's a sufficiently clear foundational theology about evangelism in mainstream churches. We know that members want their churches to grow rather than decline and close (and the suspicion is that selfish reasons are high up the list), but there's a longstanding anxiety about sharing the gospel yet no clear understanding about why and how to do so.

---

More than that:

- they feel that "proselytising" is inherently intrusive and wrong (and so un-British);

---

quote:

---

- they think that everyone knows the Christian message

---

quote:

---

(after all, we're a "Christian" country) while lamenting the fact that society is increasingly secular;

- they are not convinced of the truth or uniqueness of their message;

---

quote:

---

- they feel that it is the job of schools or the BBC to teach the Faith;

---

quote:

---

- they think it's the Minister's job to spread the Gospel, not theirs;

---

quote:

---

- they are unwilling to make their church in any way "seeker friendly";

---

quote:

---

- they wouldn't want to be mistaken for those awful Evangelicals!

---

quote:

---

Well, that's for starters!

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
But 'white' for what?

---

quote:

---

You've already implied that there's no commonly agreed meaning for the gospel or for Christian faith, and you don't approve of evangelism. So religiosity is obviously not what you think 'the field' needs.

---

quote:

---

It would be unfair to say that the fields are entirely white regarding the social care that you're looking for. The state has taken over most of the work, for which it requires particular standards of safety and training.

---

quote:

---

Some individual clergy or religious lay people do run volunteer schemes and projects with church backing, and I'm sure there could be much more, but it's the kind of work that seems to require lots of funds and manpower. To have a significant effect it would have to involve more people than just individual saintly vicars. And those vicars and their congregations would need to decide what to stop funding or doing in order to devote themselves to this kind of work.

---

quote:

---

Being practical about it, how do you think churches ought to restructure themselves in order to prioritise this kind of work?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:

The state isn't relational, exemplary, self sacrificing, hands on, encouraging, open armed, next door, neighbourly, communal, inclusive, open doored.

Islam is.

---

quote:

---

JFDI.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
The project looks impressive, but the link doesn't give many details, unfortunately. I'd like how it's being funded, apart from private donations. Which denominations are offering support? And you'd surely want to know what kind of 'Christian' teachings such urban mission was espousing, wouldn't you?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

Perhaps it's because of my Methodist and Pentecostal influences, but I'm not keen on the idea of the church as a middle class institution that has to go and eternally play Lady Bountiful to the poor. Why can't the church BE the poor?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

Perhaps it's because of my Methodist and Pentecostal influences, but I'm not keen on the idea of the church as a middle class institution that has to go and eternally play Lady Bountiful to the poor. Why can't the church BE the poor?

---

At least historically, there has been the phenomena of Lift, where the effects of Christianity have led to the valuing of education, and the assumption of some markers of middle class life. This has been the case around the world - and if it's been slower to take off in some places than others, it's often down to the weakness of institutions.

Unless you insist that people have to stay poor, then your model doesn't 'sustain' itself, because frankly being poor sucks.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Let me say firstly that we should all respect 'true saintliness'. However, few of us achieve it ourselves.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
The state isn't relational, exemplary, self sacrificing, hands on, encouraging, open armed, next door, neighbourly, communal, inclusive, open doored.
Islam is.

---

You've said this about Muslims before. I live in fairly Muslim area, with many densely Muslim areas in the vicinity. I agree that Muslims are generous people, but are they especially inclusive, or self-sacrificing, etc. etc?
They live in particular places because they're close to others of the same ethnic and religious background, or because those places are affordable for them, not because they're trying to be 'exemplary'. The wealthiest Muslims frequently move away to be among other wealthy people (although they may return sometimes to keep up with their 'roots').

---

quote:

---

JFDI.

---

quote:

---

The project looks impressive, but the link doesn't give many details, unfortunately. I'd like how it's being funded, apart from private donations. Which denominations are offering support? And you'd surely want to know what kind of 'Christian' teachings such urban mission was espousing, wouldn't you?

---

quote:

---

My earlier question stands - how would the church have to restructure itself if this was its only work, rather than also doing the other things that you deem unimportant?

---

quote:

---

Regarding evangelism, there are obviously people who deem it to be important.

---

quote:

---

But even if this doesn't apply, anyone who joins any particular group of Christians, as a result of 'true saintliness' or for any other reason, will eventually come up against the group's beliefs, the group's theology. Even a liberal group of Christians will have some sort of ideology that binds them together.

---

quote:

---

I can see, though, that focusing on highly incarnational social care is probably a good form of mission for liberal Christians.

---

quote:

---

It ties in well with social justice concerns and left-leaning politics. It doesn't require making awkward 'religious' conversation. But without such conversation you're inviting people to join a religion of works rather than faith ('What faith?').

---

quote:

---

But perhaps the future of liberal Western Christianity is primarily in works, with a dose of radical politics, rather than in assenting to various divine claims.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Martin60
Thanks for your response.

---

quote:

---

There's a strong sense of Muslim 'community' obviously because there are a lot of Muslims. When I walk though Muslims areas, as I often do, I often wonder what it would be like to be part of a broadly shared cocoon of faith like that.

---

quote:

---

British Christianity doesn't have that because it's fractured, secularised and is more about heritage than a lived, felt, shared faith. There may be other places in the world where you can experience that sense of community cohesion as a Christian, but not in Britain.

---

quote:

---

I think it's a bit unfair to claim that evangelical social projects don't have more impact. AFAICS, they're doing a great deal in extremely challenging circumstances, surely with very limited manpower and resources. And most British Christians aren't evangelical anyway; as you've said earlier, mainstream Christian denominations, including middle class vicars, ought to be more involved in this work.

---

quote:

---

With regard to evangelism, my experience as well as my reading suggest that Christian groups that take this seriously are more likely than most to grow their congregations, and hence have more money and manpower for social projects. It's pretty simple.

---

quote:

---

Congregations don't have to be evangelical to be evangelistic, but it seems much more challenging for MOTR congregations to engage visitors and others with gospel narratives. This is unsurprising, because MOTR faith is often far less certain of itself, more unsure about what constitutes the 'good news'. However, having belonged to MOTR congregations myself, I can't see a viable alternative. Good works are essential, but they require manpower and resources, and without a strong message to impart I can't see how you're going to inspire other people to join you in the work!! You and I may not agree on this, however.

---

quote:

---

The possibility I mentioned in my previous post was that non-evangelical social action might have to be more political than divine, if we're so uncertain about the divine. But even politics is swathed in confusion and uncertainty these days. The British proletariat might once have looked for left-wing solutions to its problems, but that no longer appears to be true.

---

quote:

---

Finally, the reason why I referred to 'liberal Western Christianity' is that it's liberal Western Christianity that's in most need of assistance. Christianity isn't dying out everywhere in the world. And although evangelicalism faces many (often dramatically newsworthy) problems, it's the more liberal end which shows greater signs of fatigue, a loss of nerve, a crisis of identity and purpose.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
Most Anglicans are evangelical, a broad church in itself: conservative, open (=MOTR), charismatic; in a circle or a solid, not a line, in my experience. What is the objective quantification of this great deal with so little?

[...]
It all looks like a collapse to the centre to me.

---

quote:

---

Good works are the gospel. Good works are their own reward. The kingdom IS good works, the second coming of Christ, the Incarnation IS good works, incarnation. There is NO good news apart from good works. Jam tomorrow, pie-in-the-sky-when-we-die-by-and-by is nothing (apart from the great Joe Hill's finest lyric). Pious worship isn't steak on your plate while you wait, or rather it is. Why wait? For what?

Worse than nothing.

Especially when it comes with veiled and not so veiled damnationism. With narrow, judgemental piety. The icing on the cake is that it never ends, that this is the beginning of eternity. Because Jesus. Not a problem.
[...]

Whatever isn't dying, is growing, isn't incarnational Christianity.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
How do you stop the perception that everything that is attempting to be self-sacrificial is inauthentic and patronising? As far as I can see, that perception is just about inevitable, especially given cultural conditions in this part of the world at present. Everyone is looking for a reason to be resentful and suspicious, and anything with a suspicion of cant will provide ample excuse.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
Most Anglicans are evangelical, a broad church in itself: conservative, open (=MOTR), charismatic; in a circle or a solid, not a line, in my experience. What is the objective quantification of this great deal with so little?

[...]
It all looks like a collapse to the centre to me.

---

It seems as if you're labelling other people as evangelicals who may not label themselves in this way. I'm not sure if this makes sense.

---

quote:

---

Peter Brierley, the statistician, claims that 40% of Anglicans attend worship in evangelical parishes these days (see 2nd paragraph). This is an increase, but it's not the equivalent of 'most Anglicans'. However, as I say, you seem to be casting the net wide. My experience is that so-called 'MOTR' churches don't have a particularly evangelical identity, and only a minority of their members are likely to think of themselves as evangelicals. Of course, the term 'MOTR' is a label that hardly anyone claims for themselves in any setting. AFAIUI, in the CofE it most often corresponds with a liberal-catholic identity, not an evangelical one.

---

quote:

---

However, in a sense, a 'collapse to the centre' potentially serves your purposes, if it makes evangelical churches less strictly evangelical. I don't know to what extent this has happened in the CofE, but it's certainly noticeable elsewhere, e.g. in the Methodist Church.

quote:

---

Good works are the gospel. Good works are their own reward. The kingdom IS good works, the second coming of Christ, the Incarnation IS good works, incarnation. There is NO good news apart from good works. Jam tomorrow, pie-in-the-sky-when-we-die-by-and-by is nothing (apart from the great Joe Hill's finest lyric). Pious worship isn't steak on your plate while you wait, or rather it is. Why wait? For what?

Worse than nothing.

Especially when it comes with veiled and not so veiled damnationism. With narrow, judgemental piety. The icing on the cake is that it never ends, that this is the beginning of eternity. Because Jesus. Not a problem.
[...]

Whatever isn't dying, is growing, isn't incarnational Christianity.

---

Originally I thought you were worried about Christianity dying, but I've realised that that's not it; you actually want many (perhaps most) forms of Christianity to die, don't you?

---

quote:

---

I sometimes suggest that the death of Christianity in Britain might bring about something better. But TBH there's not much sign that 'something better' is likely to arise (unless you consider the possibility of Jesus coming back soon, which isn't discussed on this forum very often).

---

quote:

---

And in any case, your proposal of a somewhat 'one size fits all' Christian theology isn't something I can assent to, because I believe that diversity is a positive element in our religion. I can't share with you a desire to dismiss the potential of powerful worship, nor the offer of eternity in God's presence. I don't see why either of these two things has to prevent us from serving other people and making life on earth better; and despite your condemnation of Christian orthodoxy there have been lives and times of service and deep brotherly and sisterly love in the history of our religion. There are today.

---

Couldn't agree less and MORE. The more inclusion of diversity the better. But worship restricted to a concert interrupted by a lecture is empty. Has not charity. Worship restricted by exclusion has not charity. Anything that negates, is an opportunity cost for worship BY charity, is worse than useless.

quote:

---

Be that as it may, I agree that there would be value in developing a form of radical incarnational Christianity that rejected traditional theology and focused primarily on a willingness to suffer alongside other suffering people. However, as I asked before, I wonder how that would be incorporated into church structures as they are now, or whether something completely new would have to be founded. The RCC has its religious who make vows of poverty and work with the disadvantaged - but they remain under the control of a strict and hierarchical denomination. The CofE is a state church, which means trying to be all things to all men. A hard job, which means helping the disadvantaged is only one of various different concerns.

---

quote:

---

Other denominations around the world have evolved to occupy particular niches in society, and I don't think there's any way of escaping from that. What you propose would also be a niche. For example, what about Christians with families? Are you expecting every family to uproot the children from school, asking spouses to change jobs, so that they can settle in a rough area?

---

quote:

---

And the liberal Christians who would in theory champion your idea may not even have the support of their non-Christian spouses and children, so what then? The self-sacrifice you envisage would most likely appeal to single Christians without other responsibilities, or to committed couples with no children, or older couples whose kids have left home. Either that, or you're looking at some sort of commune.

---

quote:

---

Geography is a factor. Places like London and the South East have attracted incarnational urban missions in the past, but they're so expensive now, meaning that employed people have to work hard just to pay the rent, and have to spend so much time commuting, that I can't imagine how reflectively incarnational they can be. There are no council flats in London for middle class graduates with office jobs, but I suppose they could consider sharing a house with 10 working class East Europeans, as opposed to sharing with 4 posh Brits like themselves.... I'm just trying to think about a few practicalities here!

---

quote:

---

But the point is, what you're envisaging is a sociological niche. Maybe your focus is purely on the clergy, but again they're also a niche group, and the clergy are just a drop in the ocean. And those with families face the same challenges I mentioned above.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:

Evangelical is as Evangelical does: "Evangelicals believe in the centrality of the conversion or "born again" experience in receiving salvation, in the authority of the Bible as God's revelation to humanity, and spreading the Christian message." (wiki)

---

quote:

---

Worship restricted to a concert interrupted by a lecture is empty.

[...] Anything that negates, is an opportunity cost for worship BY charity, is worse than useless.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
[I now worship mainly in with the CofE, but I've never heard any reference there to being 'born again'.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
Evangelical is as Evangelical does: "Evangelicals believe in the centrality of the conversion or "born again" experience in receiving salvation, in the authority of the Bible as God's revelation to humanity, and spreading the Christian message." (wiki)

---

I'm not denying the definition of evangelicalism. What I'm questioning is the extent to which evangelicalism explains the spirituality of the CofE today.

---

quote:

---

The impression I get from the Ship is that evangelical Anglicanism clusters in certain parts of the country. This means the Anglo-Catholic or fairly moderate liberal-catholic congregations are largely elsewhere. As for me, I now worship mainly in with the CofE, but I've never heard any reference there to being 'born again'. That's obviously different from your context.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Worship restricted to a concert interrupted by a lecture is empty.

[...] Anything that negates, is an opportunity cost for worship BY charity, is worse than useless.

---

I'm not sure if this a just a criticism of Sunday worship, or whether it's a criticism of what Christians do or don't do the rest of the week....

---

quote:

---

FWIW, I think the lecture/concert format is problematic as Sunday worship, but that format of itself doesn't prevent Christians from living lives of service and sacrifice the rest of the week, does it? Well, maybe it does. Some commentators have argued that this format is disempowering for the laity, and that obviously has an effect outside of Sunday worship. Not sure if this is what you're getting at, though.

---

quote:

---

With regard to the outworking of 'incarnationality', it's hard to see a way forward. The CofE is short of clergy. Most of them are from the South, but the need is greatest up North - where many don't want to go.

---

quote:

---

Googling suggests that there are some Christian communes, or communities where Christians engage in shared living, in the UK. But they seem small, and don't make the news beyond their vicinity, so you won't know of them unless you look.

---

quote:

---

Then there are concerns about the theological implications of incarnationality. I've came across a couple of American websites (because everything starts in the USA, doesn't it?) that give pause for thought. One issue is the high risk of burnout.

---

quote:

---

Another is the tendency for the worker to see him/herself as an 'incarnation' of Christ, rather than pointing the way to Christ himself.

---

quote:

---

Yet another is that by refusing to speak of Christ and the importance of Christian community you simply end up confirming the individualism or inward focus of the people you're trying to help. The other is the risk of patronisng those people by pretending to be one of them when you and they know that you're not.

---

quote:

---

A basic problem (at least in the American examples, and probably also in the few British ones) is that this kind of approach doesn't necessarily create many new Christians. So although they (and you or I) may be heavily critical of traditional Christian churches, they still need to turn to these old-fashioned sources of manpower (and probably funds) for their 'incarnational' work to be maintained. This situation is problematic, somewhat hypocritical, and likely to be unsustainable.

---

quote:

---

The incarnational approach obviously offers something distinctive and valuable, but (depending on how we define it) it wouldn't be a solution for the Church in and of itself. And it would probably always have to exist alongside and in partnership with normative congregational set-ups.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:

This kind of [incarnational] approach is the ONLY way to create new Christians. From the stones of the mean streets and their gutters.
[...]
It IS the church.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
Anadromously i.e. Lamb Chopped first and SvitlanaV2, my little pack of cards, I'll deal with you later.

I'm under no illusions about the hostility under the thin skin of all religions of the Book. That doesn't affect the comparison. They live their faith in community like no other. If we want to have ANY impact, as YOU know, we have to ... incarnate.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

With regard to the outworking of 'incarnationality', it's hard to see a way forward. The CofE is short of clergy. Most of them are from the South, but the need is greatest up North - where many don't want to go.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ethne Alba:


Why the desire not to have everything under "public" discussion?

Two reasons:
1) We are talking about people and their lives. And some people don't want other people to talk about them. Like they are some sort of 'project'.

2) Because whilst this forum is usually fine and dandy, obligingly polite and sensible - many other places are not.

---