A place for United Methodists and others to explore and share their ideas, resources, visions, and dreams of or about mission, ministry and worship in the emerging missional way... Hosted by Taylor Burton-Edwards, Director of Worship Resources, GBOD. http://www.umcworship.orgworship@gbod.org
The latest podcast from Emergent Village features Diana Butler Bass on the topic "Emergent Meets Mainline." Perhaps this will generate some discussion.
I was present for this talk, and I have to confess that I wan't really thrilled with the tinker-toy axes (more than one axis. axises?) visual. I know that all models have inherent limitations, but this one only had two dimensions on which to measure things. I'd like to think that emergent ministry can add at least a third dimension, if not more.
Nevertheless, her comments were insightful as part of the larger conversation. I just wouldn't reccomend this particular talk to someone who was new to the conversation.
I think the metaframing Diane Butler-Bass is offering here is somewhat helpful-- at least when seen from a certain kind of mainline perspective-- namely from the changes in liturgy implied in the 1979 BCP for Episcopalians and the practices that flow from and/or inform it in a variety of ways. For Episcopalians, liturgy is the heart and soul of who they are-- changes there in the BCP open up all sorts of other changes.
Where we are as United Methodists might be a bit different. While we've seen shifts in liturgical practices (some in our ritual with the 1989 hymnal, but perhaps more in the "contemporary worship" movement), it's less clear to me that these have been the drivers of our missiology. To use Butler-Bass's terminology, I might refer to these as almost "accidental"-- and I mean that also in the classic medieval/Aristotelian sense of "relating to appearances" rather than substantial (which would reflect something deeper about mission and identity).
In short, I think we've tended to "fall into" these worship practices rather than really choose a different identity-- and that shifts in identity that may have resulted from these "fallings in" may not have been thought through carefully or much at all up front.
I'd be interested in hearing any additional thoughts on that...
And the other comment-- the notion that denominational offices are trying to bring "one size fits all responses" I can say really doesn't apply to us at GBOD! Or at least I think we're trying hard for it not to apply-- while, strangely, some of the "mega-teaching churches" seem to be promoting almost precisely that sort of "plug and play" vision... you can be like us if you do the things we do, and of course you want to be like us.
The presentation concludes with this quote, kind of in response to a question raised by a younger pastor serving in a rural area and seemingly frustrated by the slower pace toward "change" there...
"When an older culture is dying, a new culture is created by people who are not afraid to be insecure" (from Margaret Wheatley)...
Question-- What elements of a rural culture are necessarily dying relative to the proposed hegemony of a postmodern culture?
Put another way, is it the case that postmodern culture, whatever that may be, is necessarily "the next thing" for rural culture in the US in such a way that rural culture is in a way dying in the face of that supposed "next thing"?
Or again, is the notion of the death of an existing culture, wherever we may find ourselves, inherent in our understanding of what "emerging" or even Christian missiology (no other labels attached) is or needs to be?
Or is something like a notion of "critical indigeneity" a better way forward?
3 comments:
I was present for this talk, and I have to confess that I wan't really thrilled with the tinker-toy axes (more than one axis. axises?) visual. I know that all models have inherent limitations, but this one only had two dimensions on which to measure things. I'd like to think that emergent ministry can add at least a third dimension, if not more.
Nevertheless, her comments were insightful as part of the larger conversation. I just wouldn't reccomend this particular talk to someone who was new to the conversation.
Billy,
Thanks for putting the link here.
I think the metaframing Diane Butler-Bass is offering here is somewhat helpful-- at least when seen from a certain kind of mainline perspective-- namely from the changes in liturgy implied in the 1979 BCP for Episcopalians and the practices that flow from and/or inform it in a variety of ways. For Episcopalians, liturgy is the heart and soul of who they are-- changes there in the BCP open up all sorts of other changes.
Where we are as United Methodists might be a bit different. While we've seen shifts in liturgical practices (some in our ritual with the 1989 hymnal, but perhaps more in the "contemporary worship" movement), it's less clear to me that these have been the drivers of our missiology. To use Butler-Bass's terminology, I might refer to these as almost "accidental"-- and I mean that also in the classic medieval/Aristotelian sense of "relating to appearances" rather than substantial (which would reflect something deeper about mission and identity).
In short, I think we've tended to "fall into" these worship practices rather than really choose a different identity-- and that shifts in identity that may have resulted from these "fallings in" may not have been thought through carefully or much at all up front.
I'd be interested in hearing any additional thoughts on that...
And the other comment-- the notion that denominational offices are trying to bring "one size fits all responses" I can say really doesn't apply to us at GBOD! Or at least I think we're trying hard for it not to apply-- while, strangely, some of the "mega-teaching churches" seem to be promoting almost precisely that sort of "plug and play" vision... you can be like us if you do the things we do, and of course you want to be like us.
Comments?
Peace in Christ...
One more thing...
The presentation concludes with this quote, kind of in response to a question raised by a younger pastor serving in a rural area and seemingly frustrated by the slower pace toward "change" there...
"When an older culture is dying, a new culture is created by people who are not afraid to be insecure" (from Margaret Wheatley)...
Question-- What elements of a rural culture are necessarily dying relative to the proposed hegemony of a postmodern culture?
Put another way, is it the case that postmodern culture, whatever that may be, is necessarily "the next thing" for rural culture in the US in such a way that rural culture is in a way dying in the face of that supposed "next thing"?
Or again, is the notion of the death of an existing culture, wherever we may find ourselves, inherent in our understanding of what "emerging" or even Christian missiology (no other labels attached) is or needs to be?
Or is something like a notion of "critical indigeneity" a better way forward?
Post a Comment