Writing For the Church

This summer I was given the opportunity to write for a particular church. I was given a text (1 Chronicles 29) and a theological theme (Giving), with the instructions to write ten short devotional pieces that would be read by a congregation. This is the most important task I have been given as a writer.

Much of what I've written in the last 3 years is intelligible to those outside of the church. I'm uncertain whether that's good or bad. But my hope with these devotional pieces is that they only begin to make sense to those who are part of a community that names a crucified Jew as the living ruler of the world. As the person who wrote them, you might assume that they make sense to me. That I know what I'm talking about.

I don't. I am guilty of saying more than I know. In writing for the church, I am writing also for myself. In the words of John Ames, I'm "trying to say what is true", which often involves saying more than one can know. But thanks be to God, Christianity is not a life of explanation but manifestation. The truth of Christian life cannot and will not finally be explained, least of all by me. It can only be only shown. And that showing takes a life time as members of Christ's body. 

The mystery of writing for the church is this: The church is not an audience for your writing, as if the church depends on what you write. Rather, you depend first on the church in order to write and in order to demonstrate the truth of your writing.

Recessional Christianity

The clue to the problem with this sickening piece is in the title, where the word "blessings" could be replaced with  "$2 billion" and the meaning would not change.

Isn't the Lord just marvellous that he would allow Christian publishers to cash in on the recession.

Promo Videos And Books

The promo video for Love Wins did its job, but it has left me wary of such tactics precisely for that reason. Scot McKnight's promo video for The King Jesus Gospel therefore leaves me uncomfortable. McKnight is a much more weighty author than Bell...in every sense of the word. Therefore the video (posted below) strikes me as an unnecessary imitation of Rob Bell's sales technique. Christians don't write books in order to sell them. A book that claims to bring us face to face with the original gospel cannot be commodified, yet that is exactly what is inferred by having a promo video attached to it. Especially a promo video that claims to disclose the true gospel to a church that is mired in counterfeits. I'll be damned if I don't wanna find out what that true gospel is...although chances are McKnight has proclaimed it already in the excellent A Community Called Atonement.

Anyway, I am wary of claims to uncover what the church has hidden for years. And I am doubly wary of such claims being made through a promo video designed to increase the sales of a book.

Taking Postmodernism to Task

What postmodernism was/is doing, according to Terry Eagleton:

[A]lienating us even from our own alienation.

Replace 'postmodernism' with 'Facebook', and does this still hold? Of course if it does, how would we ever know?

Five Favourite Footballers - Valeron

Although about seven years past his prime at the time, this four-minute video captures the subtle genius of Juan Carlos Valeron.



He is the most creative player I have ever seen - the archetype of what it looks like to play "in the hole". Diego Tristan and Roy Makaay have him to thank for their reasonably successful careers, with the latter acknowledging that Valeron is the best player he has played with. I have him to thank for mapping out the way football ought to be played.

The Mission of Theology

Every so often I find myself in the middle of an existential crisis. What on earth am I doing studying theology? What's the point of this alien discipline? Wouldn't I be better off just getting on with the real stuff of life?

Then I am reminded of the home of theology, and where I need to be:

Christian theology is relevant because it fulfills its mission: shaping a community of peace.

So says David K. Clark in his essay on "narrative apologetics". The message is disturbingly simple:

Outside of a community of peace, theologians are of all people most to be pitied.

Creation and Evolution

I'm interested in the Creation versus Evolution discussion not so much as regards which is true but rather how to read the Bible faithfully within this discussion. As a Christian, I take as a given the reality that the God revealed in Jesus is the Creator of creation, though as this God revealed to Job, I have no idea what God as Creator really means. I wasn't there.

But is that the end of the story?

In what I've read on this discussion there is a reality conspicuous by its absence in any Christian talk of creation or evolution, and that reality is New Creation. If the resurrection of Jesus changes everything, then one of the things it changes is our understanding of what it means for God to be Creator. New Creation is an ambiguous reality. It is here, but not quite. The seeds have been planted, but the flower is not yet in full boom. The child has been conceived, but there is growth in the womb still to be done. There is new creation, but it is still being created.

Moreover -- and I may come back to this with a giant eraser after I've slept on it -- creation gets to be part of its creation. God as Creator chooses to be co-Creator, at least when it comes to his most glorious creation. That is not to suggest equality between Creator and creature, but rather what Brueggemann might call "incommensurate mutuality". I think of Paul's directive to the Philipians to "work out your salvation...for it is God who works in you..." New Creation is not a passive process from humanity's perspective. We are actively involved in one way or another, not as isolated individuals but as a church - building each other up, iron sharpening iron, allowing the creative grace of God to flow through us and to cause us to be participants in the new creation of our brothers and sisters. Paul could even know himself as Timothy's father in the faith, recognising that God had made him part of this young man's birth into the family of God. This may all sound very "unphysical", but I think that is to draw lines between physicality and character that Scripture doesn't always know.

The particulars of reading old creation texts through the lens of new creation texts (and experiences) could provide some space for an imaginatively faithful rendering of the hotly contested phrase "In the beginning, God created..."

The Steps to True Belief

Stephen N. Gundry on theologian Paul Tillich:

At best Tillich was a pantheist, but his thought borders on atheism.

From Gundry's evangelical perspective, it seems it's better to be a pantheist than an atheist. Perhaps Christians are aiming too high. Instead of trying to convince atheists to jump straight into theism, pantheism may provide a suitable launchpad if we can get them there. We could even push for panentheism in one leap if we're feeling especially persuasive! What might be the next step after that? Catholicism?

I wonder what someone might say of me when I am departed?

At best Kelly was a _______, but his thought borders on _________

Feel free to fill in those blanks with as serious or as humorous an answer as you like.

In the Wind

A reed in the wind

Moved by its nature

And the nature around

Leaning left, posing no resistance.

Tomorrow may be right,

It has no preference.

Save when the wind silences.

It stands up straight, always

As if this were its true nature:

To be unmoved.

But true nature is not made to be alone.

What if the reed only stands straight

To be caught in the wind once more when it speaks?

Moving to be moved by something greater