Let Brian McLaren's voice be heard again!

This is the second part of trying to uncover what Brian McLaren has done in his book, A New Kind of Christianity. This post goes into depth the last 5 questions that his book covers. Before that, please

Question 6: What do we do about the church? – My classmate Min Ho did an awesome job about writing on this question from the book, which you can read here. For those who would call themselves Mainline Protestant, I suggest you read some of the comments on that post. Min Ho’s blog just puts it bluntly: how do we turn our presently broken churches into a house of Christ-like love?

Question 7: Can we find a way to Address Human Sexuality? Simple, have classmate Bob Rhodes blog about it here. I won’t lie, the first page or two of these chapters will catch you offguard, but how can you not like this: “Fundasexuality is rooted not in faith, but in an orientation of fear” (175). Why not put the two most personal things together in dialogue within the church: God and Sex.

Question 8: Can We Find a Better Way of Viewing the Future? I hope so. In simple terms, I can’t see Jesus and the rapture being the “way to go” in 2012. Rather, can we understand that God and the universe are in relationship with us. Mclaren, have you ever heard of process theology and John Cobb Jr.? You get hints of it from the first chapters, but there is this line that I think you hit the nail on the head: “God is like a parent guiding a child with a will of her own.” (196)… “The future is open, because the compassion and care of God are unconstricted, open wide for us to turn and find a better life than we’re now experiencing by taking a better path than we’re now walking.” (203)

Question 9: I think my classmate Jan Thomas can give the best perspective, because she is an advocate for inter-religion and unity. There’s a book written by Paul F. Knitter who describes how Christians have/will relate to other religions. I suggest you read it so that you can at least identify where you are. But like McLaren, interacting with other religions has more than just religious importance (208). I personally have came to my own conclusions through my own family: although I may not fully understand or agree with those who are not Christian or a derivation of it, I know that they are family (both personal and under the umbrella of “human family”) and will love them indefinitely.

Question 10: How Can We Translate Our Quest Into Action? Classmate Angelina Duells’s blog posts describe the how Brian McLaren writes about the different quests of Christianity. Please take a look at her rainbow diagram, which by the way, is awesome J. What I liked most is what she quoted: “When the head, heart and hand come together...then faith, reason and tradition will come together too, and personal and social holiness will be for us two expressions of one great love.” (227)

Angelina made one last blog post about this book, commenting that this book doesn’t really bring a new Christianity. To some extent, I agree: we still use the same tools of Christianity we were given before. However, I would like to add that Brian is redefining a new relationship: something that is in the process and will never finish unless we (as people, religious leaders, and Christian shepherds/pastors/leaders) actually engage in it. Maybe McLaren is not posing something new about Christianity, but something new in relationship to Christianity: redefining our relationship with God, Jesus, the Bible, with Christians and other religions, with ourselves, with our worship, with life. He started the book saying that we are Christians living in a “comfortable captivity” (31). I think its time for all Christians to start engaging in dialogue: not one-sided or gender/racially/socially-biased, but to bring to light what the rest of the world has been feeling for years. The kingdom of God is near: let us all bring a new relationship of Christ into full light. Amen.

McLaren's Book...two more chapters online!

Brian McLaren's new book has 2 more chapters you can download! go here

http://www.brianmclaren.net/archives/blog/a-new-kind-of-christianity.html

Let Brian McLaren's Voice Be Heard!

Hmm… There’s no way in which I can write all my thoughts about Brian McLaren’s new book, A New Kind of Christianity. In what has began as a class project, I would like to speak on behalf of someone who supports what Brian McLaren is proposing in his book. Type McLaren’s name into Google and you will find that this pastor and his book has been described as a “heretic” from the right side and repetitive from the left. I hope that through this post (and the next…) you would feel compelled to read this book. This post will try to expose your mind to the first 5 questions, with insight from my classmates and other bloggers.

Question 1: What is the storyline of the Bible? What we have come to understand is that the way we see the Bible has been interpreted over and over, largely in part towards Greco-Roman influence and superiority. If we strip away what we have understood as the six-lined narrative, we can see God and the purpose of Jesus in a new light. We are a product of 2000 years of being shaped into Christianity, emphasizing all the “good” and ignoring/killing/excommunicating the “bad”, “indifferent”, and “marginalized”. I suggest you watch McLaren’s answer. Chad Holtz gives an insightful perspective of what McLaren is trying to do in the first couple of chapters and in this first question here. Scroll down halfway.

Question 2: How should the Bible be understood? McLaren suggests that scripture could be, and has been used to defend and advocate any position like constitutional law (78-79). Rather, think of the Bible as an “inspired library” that has kept track these conversations so that we can continue them (83). My classmate, James Kang, takes a different direction in his blog, asking, “when will BIBLE 2.0 come out?” Chad Holtz explains his take as well.

Question 3: Is God violent? Depending on what chapter, verse, or book in the Bible can give you a range of depictions of God. You could potentially choose who you would like to pray for, as McLaren mentions Ricky Bobby as a sad example (first 2-3 mins). McLaren poses that the negative images of God need to be understood as the best depictions that our Christian ancestors could describe with words (103) and that the full image description of God has been in constant transformation to something that is culminated into what we know and to believe is Jesus.

Question 4: Who is Jesus and why is he important? McLaren is so focused on the issue that Christianity has heavy Greco-Roman influences because Jesus’ life was based upon moving away from the Greco-Roman life (126). Using the book of John, McLaren describes Jesus as the new Adam bringing a new Genesis to the world (135).

Question 5: What is the Gospel? McLaren uses Romans as the moving point: to understand the gospel that Paul preached, we have to understand the gospel that Jesus preached, which in its most raw form, it is to know that the Kingdom is at hand (138). This Kingdom, as McLaren brings to life through Romans shows that it is the presence of everyone and everything being encompassed underneath God. The Kingdom is now.

I will leave you with this until next time. Mike Morrell wrote a blog in defense of what McLaren is trying to do, which McLaren appreciates as well as I. Here is a few things of what he said:

…From my vantage point, Brian is now doing what many wish Obama would do: Grow a pair and say “You know, my message isn’t for everybody. I’ve been very diplomatic for years, but that hasn’t gotten me very far with those who continue to loathe me and my message. So now I’m going to speak plainly to those who like these kinds of conversations, which can still be all kinds of people. Except for those who, by general disposition, are inclined to (yes) ask “Is it acceptable to my religious/ideological community or belief system?” before they ask “Is it possibly true, valuable, and worth exploring?”…

Like Mike Morrell, McLaren is not above criticism. In fact I believe he wants constructive criticism. That’s the whole point. Lets actually talk about the things that we put our entire faith into.

I have no idea what Generation We're in Now...

Before doing any homework assignment, I do what I (and what I believe anyone younger than I) would normally do: look for anything that I can find about it online. We were asked to read Tom Beaudoin’s book, Virtual Faith, where Beaudoin explores Christian theology from the standpoint of GenXers. A very brief review of the book can be found here, as well as an article of Beaudoin can be found here. Currently, Beaudoin is teaching as a practical theology professor at Santa Clara University.

As we reflect on his book, which was published over 10 years ago, my classmates are divided by their opinions. My classmate and friend, James, finds that this book may be too late for those who are post-GenX, where another classmate and friend, Angelina, writes about the validity of the book for GenXers but brings to life the pop-culture that is immersed within it.

I write to you not about to write a review, as I have not read a majority of the book. I do want to post midway into reading to engage my thoughts and my peers. In this case, I carry more of a stance with James’ opinions, but receptive to the ideas that Beaudoin brings to the table with his book and with his life.

Although this book has nothing to do with my generation, I believe there are many things to note:

• Generation-defined culture is only one genre of culture. It’s safe to say that the world is multi-cultural by age, ethnicity, gender, geography, social/economic status, etc. As future religious leaders, we should be aware of the various cultures associated with GenX to engage in a more effective ministry. Furthermore, there is a need to understand the relationship between cultures. In this case, there may be a need to understand where GenXers came to be from the Baby Boomers, as Bedouin goes into detail of the origins of GenX. There should also be an equal need to understand where the next generation is being pushed by those who come from GenX.
• Relative to any form of reading, it is important to make the world relative to your frame of view – in this case, your cultural identity. I realize that I am not part of the GenXers, but the struggle to identify the differences between the theology from the Baby Boomers and the GenXers is something to reflect upon my own generation and the generation prior.
• Technology extends our senses. In a recent blog video posted by Callid Keefe-Perry for our class expresses the writings of Marshall McLuhan, explaining that “the medium is the message.” GenXers as described by Beaudoin do not see the world the same way as the generation before them. Pop culture has been their viewing window into the world. They have been witnesses of a generation of good leaders who were assassinated, and they kept their sadness in. I bring all of this in because the culmination of technology of that time period gave them this view. MTV was a major influence upon the GenX culture. I Googled/wiki’d what other factors defined GenX: home computing, internet, video games, and birth-control pills, to name a few. To believe that all of these things had no effect on GenXer views of Christianity is to hide underneath a veil of unconsciousness. I think there may be some usefulness to describe how technology extends our theology, which is the core belief of Beaudoin’s book.
• I am very aware that culture does affect the frame reference of Christianity, whether it is intentional or not. Agreed, Christianity has this built-in understanding that we can change the world through the transformation of the Holy Spirit. These two articles (one written by my professor, Phillip Clayton, and the other written by Pastor Chad Holtz) dialogue on the emphasis of Christianity on culture or visa-versa. It is my understanding that Christianity from a missionary point of view was most effective by adapting and emerging from the native culture. Many countries have been assimilated into Christianity with this method. If that is the case however, the world will always change because of Christianity, and Christianity will always need to acclimate to whatever culture it is immersed in to be effective. Yes, another chicken and the egg routine similar to James’ blog comments, but also promotes the need of new age theologians who can incorporate new technology and new culture.

I hope that Christianity is affected by technology, because Christianity needs to be more influential in the technology used today. I do not mean this in any evangelistic notion or anything, but rather, to ask how modern technology has affected Christianity so that we as Christians can develop theologies and theological practices for emerging generations/cultures, whether physical or virtual. Here are some weird notions you can all play around with:

• What are the latest technologies that have been made or exploded in popularity within the last 10 years? Do they have any relevance to the changes/trends on Christianity or religion in general?
• Some things to consider: cell phones, laptop/touchpad computers, ipod and other MP3 players, Kindle readers, Toyota Prius (Gen. 2 and 3), multi-core computer processors, digital cameras, Wikipedia and Urban Dictionary, Facebook, Twitter, etc.
• More random things to consider: YouTube, Farmville, Xbox 360, Wii, doppelganger week, etc. (also, the emergence of nanotechnology in the various fields of science. History goes back as far as 1960’s but has been more mainstream within the last 10 years.)
• There have been people who have emerged in amazing popularity within the last 10 years who have played a role in our culture and Christianity as well. They may have also affected Christianity in more ways than none: Barack Obama, Taylor Swift, Star Wars Kid, Beyonce Knowles, Osama Bin Ladin, Miley Cyrus, Dave Chappelle, Manny Pacquiao, Sarah Palin.

• Technology now seems to be in a place where new technology does not extend the senses farther, but extends the senses faster. What does that mean to Christianity?

• Can Christianity be just as effective in virtual communities like Facebook, twitter, Myspace, blog communities, and other virtual environments like instant messaging, chat rooms, etc.? This is the big question to where my TAG class revolves around, but I mean it is worth noting if a person could take all the various aspects of Christianity and create a theology that is relative to the current generation, maintains a level of practicality, and has the capacity to hold onto past theological doctrines/commitments.

I’m done :)

-Jon

Claremont School of Theology And The United Methodist Church Parting Ways?

Yesterday, I received an email from my school that said the following:

“The administration of Claremont School of Theology learned last week that the University Senate of The United Methodist Church placed the School on Public Warning and embargoed denominational funds for the remainder of the School's fiscal year…”

Not the best email to read right before you go to bed…

As I continued to read, the email writes for that this will NOT affect my ordination process into the United Methodist Church. I have been dwelling over the news while I slept to reflect on my attendance at Claremont School of Theology (CST).

I entered into CST in the fall of 2008. I had been aware of some of the issues pertaining to the school, but I still decided on attending. As I continued my first year at the school, I realized that the school was making positive efforts to have the school receive its full accreditation status. I believed at that moment that attending this school was a good decision.

Reading the news release being placed on the school, as well as comments and responses, I do not know what to exactly think of the vision and direction of the school. The school has always held ecumenical openness in high regard and has pushed towards the respect of all religions ever since I have attended classes. This has allowed me to be more respectful and culturally sensitive to persons of other religions, as it has been my own personal pet peeve when people from other cultures naïvely step on my toes. On my own behalf, CST has been able to show me that culture has been the key to inviting others to Christ, whether that means by reflecting on the historical Christian missions or through the community presence of Christ. However, CST’s new vision and direction has placed the “golden child” of the UMC on the “naughty list.”

One of the reasons why I wanted to attend was because this used to be one of the prized seminaries of the UMC, but the direction of CST places the school in tension with the UMC organization. Some pastors like Talbot Davis believe that the vision of the seminary looks like a form syncretism due to the absence of Jesus Christ or Christianity (which I must add, I too did believe this when I first heard of the new vision of CST back in September). It would seem that way unless you hear CST president Jerry Campbell speak of the overall vision of CST becoming even more inter-religious than before. This would allow other religions to come to an academic institution to study their own faith while interacting with others. Financially speaking, it's a smart move because it allows the school to pull in a larger pool of students. On another note, it would help those from other religions to become leaders through an academic setting that they may not have had the opportunity to before. More importantly, I believe that it is true that an inter-religious seminary to have the potential of strengthening Christians because they are more aware of the world around them, and can affirm their own faith against a religiously/ethnically diverse school. After all, I have been here for almost two years and still believe in the salvation of Christ and the presence of God's love in the world.

Jerry Campbell, the president of CST, assures that this will be cleared in the next few months, just in time to have a worry-free summer. Until then, I will keep my faith that the issues between CST and the UMC will be clarified. CST has not failed me, as it has supported me in many different ways, one of which was affirming my calling into ministry. To not have the support of the UMC would be a disappointment to me as well as many other pastors and CST students/alumni.

Please let me know your thoughts and prayers. God bless!

Jon