CHURCH & THE CULTURE (Posted 2011-06-02 18:25:55 by ArchPaladin) It never fails. Spend a fair amount of time away from the blog, and then when one topic comes in you suddenly get swamped with things to say. The emerging church [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerging_church ] [wikipedia.org] is an interesting idea. If you want a real-life example, you can look at Moot [ http://www.moot.uk.net/ ] [moot.uk.net] It's too broad an idea to describe in a post, but perhaps the most salient point that I took away from the concept is the idea that the church's appearance (and to a point, its language) is going to be directed by the culture from which its members come. This is in contrast to a point of view I often hear - namely that the church is largely to transcend the culture from which it comes because the church is a community whose culture is provided by God in Scripture. Of course, in practice this often works out to a community attempting to adopt the cultural practices of the denomination that they are a part of - meaning that they are picking up practices that were most relevant at a certain point in time for a particular culture of people. I admit I find this a very challenging issue. The tradition that I come from falls into the camp that church should be separate from the surrounding culture. As a whole I agree with this view, but in practice the things that I would adopt or see implemented are very contextual. I also acknowledge that the things that speak to my generation (at this point in our lives) also require a lot of cultural involvement. Obscure or traditional practices done for their own sake, or for the sake of tradition, are likely to be met with apathy if not outright ignored or dismissed out-of-hand. Furthermore, I acknowledge that the actions of the actual first-century churches in Rome, Greece, and Asia often also had contextual elements to them (consider the Corinthian dispute on head coverings, and Paul's discussions on liberty) - an oft overlooked point by those who want to transcend culture. The problem I find in resolving this question is that I have great difficulty seeing how to work this in a modern era without leading to all sorts of interpersonal conflict and shattering the church, and this presents me with a number of questions: * Is it wrong to have discussions over heretical teachings? Christianity should be able to stand for itself. * Am I unable to come up with a reconciliation because of my traditions or in spite of them? * Do I perceive this conflict because of my tendency to hold to traditional doctrine too strongly? * Do I not have a broad enough perspective of God or Christian community to see how this could work? * Is this all just a moot question because it would instead result in small, tight-knit communities? My following of this topic derails at this point. I tend to think that a more thorough historical understanding of how the church has dealt with heresy and fracture would be a good way to address these questions, but I currently lack this knowledge. Overall I think that these ideas have a lot of merit to them, but are easily open to abuse. And as a whole, I have seen too few examples of the emerging church to see how this would work peacefully. -------- There are no comments on this post.