Critical Christianity

The reforming processing took place with influencers such as Duns Scotus, 13th Century Scottish Franciscan who advocated a practical theology whereby theology should have no separation from prayer, nor dogma from doxology, nor knowledge of God from living communion. The task of theology was/is to guide the life of prayer, praise and communion. Going further back it was an understanding of Anselm’s faith seeking understanding of the Triune God. A rooting of text back into daily life. Then there is the likes of Erasmus, (widely misunderstood in his day) who advocated a Critical Christianity denouncing the pharisaical religion made up of routine practices and works drained of their spirit, a religion of false devotio (that made too much of practices devoid of any honest heart pietas response to grace) which became nothing more than the accumulation of observances. Erasmus returned to essentials of inner piety and the Gospel. So the ground was prepared for the Reformers to continue honing a reformation theology that grew out of their own medieval matrix out of which some was affirmed, modified or abandoned.
It seems to me that any significant ‘reforms’ in church history have all been concerned with a recovery of how we read scripture and it’s place among the community of God’s people and in relation to how it is communicated afresh in the context of that day and provides the necessary ‘constraints’ of Scripture and Tradition. This highlights the under-girding tension of tradition and improvisation into the ‘new emergent’. Begbie (Theology Music and Time) speaks of liberating constraints and in an exploration of Church tradition (noting several points) states that ‘improvisation reminds us powerfully of the futility of searching for a tradition – free environment of creativity.’(217) He reminds us that the intelligibility of any music depends on proven traditions of practice, interpretation and belief as an interpretative grid. There is a necessary apprenticeship required before one can move to find one’s own place and voice so to speak and improvise. Put another way, ‘Spontaneity.. is but the outcome of years of training and practice and thousands of experiments’ Hauerwas (Against the Nations,95)
I do believe that today’s emergent, particularly within the mainstream establishment Presbyterian, Baptist or otherwise, is concerned with living in the in-between place where liberating constraints are beginning to operate. Constraints like it or not give us our identity – one being Scripture. Engaging with this and negotiating this and other constraints (occasional – such as those localized, specific to a social, spatial, situation; cultural – those aspects which come from our own experience, frames of reference, etc; continuous- those things that condition us and are givens) requires improvisation that enables freedom to flourish, is risky and is not predictable. Certeau’s ‘making do’ seems to me to be similarly concerned.

When we bring such things to bear upon worship and the totality of ministry in the emergent then it is concerned with making disciples and learning what it is to be the ‘body’ of Christ. Yesterday we asked “IF we are the body …”

It integrated Romans 12 v1-8 and Ephesians 4 v1-16 as with references to Matthew 18-20 (instances of Jesus teaching of radical new practices of the Christian community). We explored the invitation to live in God’s presence and the realisation that each belong to all in the body with diverse gifts. What does the body-ness of the church look like ? Everyone had a coloured card tile and was asked to come to the front where we had a Bible, baptismal font and Table with Communion cup on. They were invited to take a coloured tile and place it on the Table around the cup and remain around the front of the Church. Once this happened I asked them to look around and see everyone gathered around the now colourful table. We then blessed one another. It was good to see everyone then instantly mix and chat and wander off to coffee.