I have already argued (below) that we in the established / inherited churches can learn much from the Emerging Church movement about how to be Faithful, Creative, Missional Communities. But I wonder what whether there are certain things about church that are non-negotiable – things that we must be careful not to lose or change no matter how much we contextualise or reach out in mission?
One of the books I read during my sabbatical (John E. Colwell, Promise and Presence: An Exploration of Sacramental Theology) particularly challenged me in this regard. The amazon.co.uk ‘editorial review’ describes John’s book like this:
“A ground-breaking, evangelical sacramentalist approach to the seven sacraments …
Following an introduction that briefly reviews the development of sacramental theology the book begins with an exploration of God’s Triune identity and the implications of this doctrine for the gracious and mediated nature of God’s relatedness with the world …
A central section follows in which a doctrine of the Church and a doctrine of Scripture are expounded in response to this understanding of the gracious and mediated nature of God’s relatedness. Both Church and Scripture are identified as conferring context, definition, and validity on all other sacramental events …
The final section reconsiders the seven Sacraments of the Catholic tradition in the light of an understanding of sacramentality developed in the first two sections of the book. The Sacraments are discussed from a Baptist perspective but with a committed ecumenical intent and an underlying awareness of the contemporary British and North American context within which the Church exists and Scripture is heard.”
I think I’m right in saying that John describes a sacrament as something (an event, ritual, etc.) through which God has promised to be present in a special way. In the second section of the book, he sets out how both the church and God’s Word are ‘sacramental’: certainly I don’t hear any EC groups denying the central place of Scripture. Perhaps more controversially, though, John’s third section deals with the seven ‘traditional’ sacraments: baptism, confirmation, Eucharist (Communion or the Lord’s Supper), penance (or cleansing), healing, ministry and marriage.
If God has promised to be present of at work in and/or through these things, then do they constitute a set of ‘non-negotiables’ for any and all churches? Or has anyone got a different list?
I’d love to know what folk out there think!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I think we need to take the 7 sacraments seriously, but i don't think i would use the words 'non-negotiables' that boxes God's activity to only here. I think we need a more sacramental understanding of baptism, eucharist, marriage and ministry in particular. Many emerging churches are doing interesting and innovative stuff with the eucharist - i think other 'sacraments' have not as yet been explored. Having said my understanding of chruch is one where baptism and eucharist are practised.
Thanks for that Andy. Perhaps 'non-negotiables' is the wrong word to use You're right, we mustn't run the risk of boxing God in. But if God has promised to be specially present or working in/through these things then we would be foolish (whether in the Inherited or Emerging Churches) to neglect them.
There's two tensions at play here:
1) being a missional church and not practising things that people aren't able to 'connect' with at all
2) being a church that acknowledges that God has given us some things to do, to remember Him and to declare our following of Him.
I don't think it's a question of not practising the sacraments. Rather I think it's more a challenge, as Andy has observed, in finding new ways to practise and explain them. That said, I don't think this is easy, so I'd love to hear from others on how this is being done.
Post a Comment