Integrating Missionally

Worship Music

Worship is continuously in danger. It is in danger of commodification, being debased into a commodity for consumers who are shipping for the best buy in God or the latest in spiritual fashions. But the moment that God or the things of God are packaged and then advertised as programs or principles or satisfaction, we are depersonalized, diminishing our capacity to love. There is not much chance of growing to the measure of the stature of Christ in a place of worship that markets goods and services stamped with a God logo. This very place and time given us to cultivate conditions congenial for acquiring an understanding of and companionship in the practice of love is no lover available.

The extensive commodificaiton of worship in America has marginalized far too many churches as orienting centers for how to live a more effective life for God. What the secular culture has done to love by romanticising it into fornication and the pracice of adultery, the ecclesial culture has done by promoting ways of worship calculated to appeal to consumer tasttes in which love is redefined as “Oh, I like that,” or “I have to have that,” or negatively as “I don’t get anything out of that.”

From Practice Resurrection: A Conversation on Growing Up in Christ

Popularity: 4% [?]

An interesting question, don’t you think?

The definition of worldview
According to Wikipedia, a worldview “is the fundamental cognitive orientation of an individual or society encompassing natural philosophy, fundamental existential and normative postulates or themes, values, emotions, and ethics. The term is a loan translation or calque of German Weltanschauung, composed of Welt, ‘world’, and Anschauung, ‘view’ or ‘outlook’. It is a concept fundamental to German philosophy and epistemology and refers to a wide world perception. Additionally, it refers to the framework of ideas and beliefs through which an individual interprets the world and interacts with it.”

What is a Christian worldview?
A Christian worldview “is identified primarily as a set of doctrines or a system of beliefs” [1]

Francis Beckwith offers a definition of worldview. He says,

What we mean is that the Christian faith is a philosophical tapestry of interdependent ideas, principles, and metaphysical claims that are derived from the Hebrew-Christian Scriptures as well as the creeds, theologies, communities, ethical norms, and institutions that have flourished under the authority of these writings. These beliefs are not mere utterances of private religious devotion but are propositions whose proponents claim accurately instruct us on the nature of the universe, human persons, our relationship with God, human communities and the moral life. [2]

Christian thinker James W. Sire defines a worldview as “a commitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart, that can be expressed as a story or in a set of presuppositions (assumptions which may be true, partially true, or entirely false) which we hold (consciously or subconsciously, consistently or inconsistently) about the basic construction of reality, and that provides the foundation on which we live and move and have our being.” He suggests that “we should all think in terms of worldviews, that is, with a consciousness not only of our own way of thought but also that of other people, so that we can first understand and then genuinely communicate with others in our pluralistic society.” [3] Read the rest of this entry »

Popularity: 8% [?]

The following is a two part series on the images of knowing. Today I look at the images that form the idea of truth.

The message education should convey is not identified by words like “fact,” “theory,” or “objective”. Instead, the message is called “truth.” The English word for “truth” comes from a Germanic root that also gives rise to the word “troth,” as in the ancient vow “I pledge thee my troth.” With this word, one person enters a covenant with another, a pledge to engage in a mutually accountable and transforming relationship. To know something or someone in truth is to enter troth with the known. To know truth is to become betrothed, to engage the known with one’s whole self. To know in truth is to allow one’s self to be known as well, to be vulnerable to the challenges and changes any true relationship brings. To know in truth is to enter into the life of that which we know and allow it to enter into ours. Truthful knowing weds the know and the known; even in separation, the two become part of each other’s life and fate.

Therefore, truth has nothing to do with manufacturing a world, keeping it at a distance, or manipulating it to suit our needs. Truth involves entering in to a relationship with someone or something genuinely other than us, but with whom we are intimately bound. Truth contains the image we are seeking – the image of community in which we were first created, the image of relatedness between knower and known.

Educating towards truth does not mean turning away from facts and theories and objective realities. If we devote ourselves to truth, the facts will not necessarily change. What will change is our relation to the facts. Truth requires the knower to become interdependent with the known.

The following was adapted from Parker Palmer’s book To Know as We Are Known: Education as a Spiritual Journey

Popularity: 3% [?]

The following is a two part series on the images of knowing. Today I look at the images that form the idea of objectivism.

The shape of our knowledge becomes the shape of our living. Seeing people as thinkers requires that we acquire knowledge in a certain way, a way much different than seeing people as lovers. It also shapes the knowledge we trust and value.

If we are thinkers, we value worlds like “fact” and “theory” and “objective.” The images and metaphors developed from these words give us insight into not only on the knowledge we value, but also in how we understand our world and shape our lives.

The word “fact” is vital. Finding the “facts’ marks the turn from primitive superstition to modern science, from subjective knowledge based on feeling, intuition, and faith to objective knowledge that can be tested by our senses. Fact comes from the Lain facere, “to make.” This image of “making” suggests that a fact is something created by the human hand – meaning that is most clearly seen in our words manufacture and artifact. This tells us something interesting about our way of knowing: we are busily engaged in trying to construct a livable world with our facts.

Another key word is “theory”. Our facts do not arrange themselves automatically into structures we can inhabit. So we spin theories, webs of connective logic, to order and integrate our facts. Theory is the thread that weaves our factual world together.

“Theory” comes from the Greek theoros, or “spectator,” one of a complex of Greek words having to do with the sort of viewing and observing that characterize a theatre audience. This image suggests another feature of modern knowing: we regard what we know as “out there,” on a stage, and we relate to it from a distance. Our knowledge does not draw us into a relationship with the known, into participation in the drama. Instead, it holds us at arm’s length as detached analysts, commentators, evaluators of each other and the world. The Greeks regarded drama as integral to life, not a spectator sport but a soul-making force. We, however, made a rigid distinction between the observer and the observed for the sake of objectivity. Where Greek audiences were able to put themselves at the center of the play – literally allowing it to “play” upon them – we hold ourselves apart for fear of distorting the objective facts with our subjective needs. Read the rest of this entry »

Popularity: 3% [?]

James Smith new book

I have been reading Desiring the Kingdom: Worship, Worldview, and Cultural Formation (Cultural Liturgies)by James K.A. Smith. Smith sees Christian education as really spiritual formation. I wanted to note his ideas, of which I’ve interjected my own of what he calls philosophical anthropology.

How we think about education is linked to how we think about human persons. Too much of our thinking about education sees it as a matter of disseminating information precisely because it assumes that human beings are primarily thinking things. This understanding has moved into the Christian educational process. Christian education has adopted a picture of human beings that owes more to modernity and the Enlightenment than it does to the holistic, biblical vision of humans. In particular, Christian education has adopted a philosophical anthropology that sees humans as primarily thinking things. The result has been an understanding of education largely in terms of information; more specifically, the end of Christian education has been seen to be the dissemination and communication of Christian ideas rather than the formation of a peculiar people. This has been most articulated in terms of a Christian worldview.

A Christian worldview is primarily a set of doctrines or a system of beliefs or a set of implicit ideas. This construction creates a Christian faith that is dualistic and reductionistic. It reduces the Christian faith primarily to a set of ideas, principles, claims and propositions that are known and believed. The goal of this is to create “correct” thinking. This relies on the description of Descartes: thinking things that are containers for ideas. This generates a rationalistic view of self where we are not only reduced to thinking things but are seen as things whose bodies are nonessential containers for our minds. This also creates our dualistic approach: There is a distinction between our bodies and minds and neither affects the other.

Humans, however, are fundamentally desiring creatures. We are what we love, and our love is shaped, primed, and aimed by liturgical practices that take hold of our heart and aim it to certain ends. Humans are primarily lovers, not thinkers or believers. Read the rest of this entry »

Popularity: 3% [?]