Monday, March 8, 2010

Reflecting on Brian Mclaren and Small Business School

I received a comment from Small Business School in response to Brian McLaren's new book, A New Kind of Christianity. It made me think about the image of the church in terms of continuity, symmetry, and harmony. I've tried processing what this person was trying to describe as he writes about the relationship of perfection and business that incorporates religion.

After one week, I've tried to reflect upon it here. Thank you Small Business School for your comment and your article.

I want to say that I did like your article. It was certain that the boundaries that was set within McLaren's book does not pertain to the whole in terms of philosophy, theology...Christianity. It disrupts continuity in the sense that it feels like a step backward in the evolution of Christianity. It looks unsymmetrical in its relationship, and creates a form of chaos that does not reflect the harmony of Christianity.

An initial observation from a religious stance is that the three factors of religion that you describe is very Buddhist in its nature. Which is fine, but the argument that you put against McLaren seems to be just as restricting when you describe religion in three purposes. It is as if a Muslim argued against a Christian for not thinking past the Bible, but then uses the Koran for their argument. I don't think it promotes the best dialogue because I there needs to be an understanding that both come from different paradigms. Be as it may, I wanted to try to interact with the three factors that Small Business School had mentioned in their article.

  • Continuity - I would like to say that the history of Christianity has always shown and promoted times of discontinuity. In the Bible, if Moses conformed with what he was given, would he have ever freed the Jews? Jesus' life is based upon defying those who were the religious leaders of his day, and if he were to have continued that life there would have been no such thing as Christianity. In a more tangible sense, Martin Luther's life was criticized for going against the Christian norms, but in many ways, he along with many others including John Wesley led to the creation of protestantism. a few centuries later, a man by the name of Martin Luther King Jr. will also defy millions of Christians to fight racism. On a bird's eye view, Christianity has evolved and been continuous towards perfecting life. It is also certain to say that life is not perfect. At all. Therefore, there will be a need for those within Christianity to show various insights of the world - some will look radical and will cause an uproar like McLaren's book. There can also be an argument that perfection in a continuous sense is subject to the paradigm/viewpoint it was formed within; as we move towards a deeper sense of perfection, there is more difficulty to bring everyone together. I don't expect everyone to be on-board with McLaren, and if it is not to succeed then I will let God make that call. Rather, using his book as a springboard into the issues for today's Christians will give those dividing answers of what people really believe what perfection is. I believe what McLaren is trying to do is simply to show us where the problems/"forks in the road" where Christians do not agree with each other.
  • Symmetry - A symmetrical relationship in terms of religion seems to be the most confusing, as I was not sure if it was meant in terms of vertical relationship between God and person, person-to-person, or in other relationships with church and God, church and people, etc. Truth is, we live in a society where relationships are becoming...something not traditional? I'm confused too. I think that there's a point to Small Business School where symmetrical relationships are important. To add onto that, I want to say this: how do Christians define a symmetrical relationship to God, the church, and to the world? I personally think that many Christians do not understand their relationship with the other OR the relationship has been unsymmetrical and always biased towards one side.
  • Harmony. My first sermon was based upon a story of Jesus where he describes himself not to come down to this earth to bring peace, but to divide nations (here's the best way I can describe this). I concluded that this may also deal with the creation of paradigms. You can create harmony, but it is always contained within the paradigm itself. Paradigms shift when this harmony is conflicted, either with the problems associated with the paradigmatic viewpoints, or with the solutions associated with the problems. I believe that Brian McLaren's book was not meant to bring peace to Christians...but to just think of what issues the world has to offer. A person may his/her answer in the Bible; others may find it in community of Christians, or in the relationship with nature, science, culture, society, or in prayer. It reaffirms the paradigm they are within, or it sparks a new paradigm, creating that continuity that religions provide, but the beginnings of a harmonious relationship that needs to be more clearly defined both in reflective understanding and practice of faith.
I think a more systemic issue pertaining to the contributions of the article for business that relates to religion is that religion is a business. I think you can find some pastors who would admit that administratively, the church is a business that provides an exchange of services. My argument is that the church should have never adopted this understanding. There is a need for the church to provide services in order to stay afloat. It makes the church safe and comfortable. Keep in mind that I have no background in business. But I would hope just like in business, for the church to take risks in order to achieve greater continuity, symmetry, and harmony.

I hope this spurs all Christians and non-Christians to comment on this post. Thank you very much.

No comments: