Wednesday, April 06, 2011
When Fresh expressions suddenly made me claustrophobic
It’s Lent. A time to focus on Christ and what it means to live as Christ followers. So I’ve started to tuck into Rooted in Jesus Christ: Towards a Radical Ecclesiology
A few pages in he discusses the place of martyrs for theology.
“In recent decades, liberation theology has become a theology of martyrdom. A number of bishops (the best known being Archbishop Oscar Romero in El Salvador, Bishop Enrique Angelelli in Argentina, and Bishop Juan Gerardi in Guatemala), various priests and nuns (including the six Jesuits of the Universidad Centro-americano Jose Simeon Canas in San Salvador), and thousands of catechists and members of base communities have been killed for their commitment to the gospel of liberation. These martyrs offer a witness to the meaning and implications of following Christ in a violent world, Their testimony is much needed to overcome the effects of a cultural context that emphasises comfort and tends to forget the anonymous victims of injustice.” (4)
Why martyrs only four pages into a book on Jesus today? Well he is arguing that these martyrs, not just one, but many, are one of the four key permanent contributions of liberation theology to the ongoing task of theological reflection. That you can’t think and act on Jesus without a struggle that is radical, so radical it might even be life-giving.
Suddenly some of the fresh expressions talk I’ve been part of began to feel claustrophobic. I couldn’t think of many martyrs, although I can think of hours spent arguing about American authors, or the use or otherwise of pop culture, or candles, in worship.
Recently I reflected that mission is a 3D triangle. It needs to include
- words, the talking of the Jesus story
- deeds, the practical helps of listening well, of offering mercy, of seeking justice
- prayer, whether in monastic patterns of faithful prayer, or of worship performed in representation of a hurting world, or in “power evangelism” in which the sick are prayed for
- societal rebuilding in which Christians join with Nehemiah in rebuilding broken walls, follow Daniel who gave himself to just administration, echo Dueteronomy and seek to build cities of refuge
Fresh expressions claims to be about mission. But it runs the danger of becoming a church-centric, worship-focused program.
The feelings of claustrophobia lifted as I read on. Daniel offers a few critiques of liberation theology. One is that the use of praxis was too narrow. Praxis is not only political – it is also about ordinary, daily life, the real practices and lives of the people, “the whole reality as it really is, not as we would like it to be.” (7) In Australia this might not be matyrdom, but it is the way we eat, it is the way we shop, it is how we culture-make.
This offers a generative moment for fresh expressions. Daniel continues;
“there is a significant ecclesial role in the cause of people’s liberation … we need to strengthen Christian identity – including spirituality, liturgical life, and a factual sense of belonging.” (10)
In other words, Fresh expressions is vital as it encourages a ecclesial role that is contextual for First-world cultures. Fresh expressions remains essential as it seeks to nourish Christian identity in ways that make sense for 21st century disciples.
Fresh expressions is claustrophobic if the goal is fresh expressions. It is full of potential if the hope is cultural transformation in an alignment with God’s inbreaking Kingdom.
But what of where I started? What is the place of martyrs in Fresh expressions? Perhaps in the reminder of a life of love lived freely and radically, the invitation to love our enemies, not as an option for mature Christians who have their act together, but as a core of discipleship.
A radical Lenten following of Jesus?
)
An important message thanks for sharing.
Comment by Dan Anear — April 6, 2011 @ 1:53 pm
Hi Steve. I wonder whether we are beginning to talk too much about ‘Fresh Expressions’. I say this as one who generally supports it. The danger is that it will just become another church programme. Already it is becoming something of an institution in itself, a bit in-ward looking and suffering from excessive ‘labelling’: whose in, whose out and what is it and why we are different, and do we need to light candles at every service etc. I agree we need to make sure it remains ‘fresh’ and make sense to 21st century disciples. My hunch is that the Spirit will move us on from ‘fresh expressions’ to something else. By the time it is established and accepted it will have become an old expression of a fresh thing. Martyrdom requires us to die to self, even our ‘fresh expression’ self.
Comment by Chris McLeod — April 6, 2011 @ 4:03 pm
Having studied Liberation Theology in South America with Juan Luis Segundo what I read really resonates with me. You’ve articulated in some way some of the ‘strange’ feelings I’ve also had about ‘fresh expressions’, and all the rest. It will be good to read further and reflect on this.
Comment by Bruce Grindlay — April 7, 2011 @ 9:21 am
[…] Steve Taylor wrote about mission as a 3D Triangle. I suspect that readers of this blog consider these aspects to be what is important. I found […]
Pingback by Mission is a 3D Triangle – Steve Taylor « SU Neighbourhood Outreach — April 8, 2011 @ 12:30 pm