Image 01

W. Davd Phillips

Integrating Missional Thinking, Living, and Culture

Posts Tagged ‘Theology’

Baptists and Sacramentalism: Recovering the Sacramentals

Thursday, April 22nd, 2010

Finally I am getting back to a series of posts on Baptists and Sacramentalism. In this post I want to give some reasons, taken from Clark Pinnock’s chapter in Baptist Sacramentalism: Studies in Baptist History and Thought, as to why Baptists should recover some sense of the Sacraments. (Make sure you read the previous post to consider the range of meanings of sacraments.)

First, because “as humans we are embodied and symbol-making beings, it is a priori likely that God’s presence and self-communication will be sacramental and involve a merging of spirit and matter. It is likely that God would give himself to us in a variety of concrete ways.” Though Len Sweet is a Methodist, I think his definition is a helpful way of thinking about sacraments. He says that sacramentals communicate grace. Sacraments convey grace. If that is the case, God communicates grace through the Spirit to us in ways that we can best experience that grace. At the same time, the Spirit may cause us to experience that grace in ways we don’t normally expect or even want. For instance, we may not think to consider a sacramental of failure or suffering. Yet those are ways in which the invisible Spirit of God can be made visible, and in doing so, we experience the grace of God and the sustenance of the Spirit through visible and palpable means.

Pinnock also notes how worship has been impacted by the loss of the sacramentals. Worship is “weakened by a loss of the sacramental dimension, a loss of mystery, of liturgical beauty and of traditional practices.” Modernity’s demand for physical causation and its disregard for divine action can render Christianity powerless, not expecting God to be present or move with power. With that, we have, I fear, replaced an expected move of God with the rock concert emotionalism of contemporary Christianity. God only moves when we have a “great time” in worship. The still small voice is absent because of the cheering and hand-clapping. The mysterious is missing. There is little room for the possibility of signs and wonders, miracles, and healings. We need to embrace the mysterious Spirit who shapes material creation and empowers resurrection. The Spirit is not some “holy ghost” who never deals with the material, never creates real effects, never manifests itself and never transforms concrete situations. The Spirit deals with the physical just as Jesus did. Therefore, the presence of God can be conveyed by the Spirit through the physical.

We can experience the grace of God through the Spirit in suffering, failure, or in fellowship. We can experience the grace of God through the reading of scripture, the setting of the sun, or the bread and wine. Grace does not come through the act itself, but in experiencing the Spirit by means of the sacramental.

God or God’s Will? What is the difference?

Tuesday, March 30th, 2010

Missional Church

I have just started doing some research in Colossians. In 1:1, Paul says: “Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,” (NASB). In discussing this, NT Wright, in his Colossians and Philemon: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries), says:

This doesn’t indicate just the source of Paul’s authority, but links him and his purpose to the overarching divine plan of salvation. This was prepared in the Old Testament and brought to climax in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. It was now being put into effect through the world-wide mission in which Paul had been given a key initiating role.

This got me thinking about our activities as people and as communities of Faith. Our activities should only flow out of on expression of His will. They flow from God as the source of his will, truly, but there is bigger issue. These aren’t activities for me or the church I serve alone. What we do is bigger than that. They operate from an intentional flow put together by God before there was time.

In transforming our thought process from God to God’s will, it causes us to see our plans as part of a bigger purpose – His mission. This is bigger than just seeing people come to Christ. This is bigger than putting together a mission trip. We need to locate all of our activities into the activity of God’s re-creative purposes: recreating the world and recreating the lives of people. Our actions have a impact that exceeds time, location, and space.

When we see are actions as part of the bigger will of God, we place ourselves and our communities into a world bigger than our own. It is not about us. It is about us and others together. We need to consider the implications of our actions and plans on the local communities of Faith as well as the global community of Faith. How does that new building fit into God’s plan for all churches in the community you live and serve? How does planting that church impact other communities of Faith that exist where you live and serve?

This thinking creates an “other” mentality. It should help us partner together to reach our communities, both locally and globally. When one church is hurting, all of our churches should hurt. When one church needs help, the others should rally around that church to help it. If God is blessing the church you serve in, work with leadership in other churches in your community to bring them along. If they refuse, that’s one thing. But to not want to help and to not offer help is an outrage.

It isn’t about us or even our church. It is about our place in the overarching will of God. The individualism that pervades our churches keeps us at odds with each other far too often. We need to let go, join together with those who confess Jesus as Lord, and move forward together, expressing our part of the will of God while helping other members of the body be healthy as well.

The Ontological Church

Monday, March 15th, 2010

Be-ing or Do-ing

Americans talk and write endlessly about what the church needs to becoming, what the church must do ot be effective. The perceived failures of the church are analyzed and reforming strategies prescribed. The church is understood almost exclusively in terms of function – what we can see. If we can’t see it, it doesn’t exist. Everything is viewed through the lens of pragmatism. Church is an instrument that we have been given to bring about whatever Christ commanded us to do. Church is a staging ground for getting people motivated to continue Christ’s work.

This way of thinking – church as a human activity to be measured by human expectations – is pursued unthinkingly. The huge reality of God already at work in all the operations of the Trinity is benched on the sideline while we call timeout, huddle together with our heads bowed, and figure out a strategy by which we can compensate for God’s regrettable retreat into invisibility. This dead wrong., and it is responsible for no end of shallowness and experimentation in trying to achieve success and relevance and effectiveness that people can see. Statistics provide the basic vocabulary for keeping score. Programs provide the game plan. This way of going about things has done and continues to do immeasurable damage to the American Church.

This way of understanding church is very, very American and very, very wrong. We can no more understand church functionally than we can understand Jesus functionally. We have to submit ourselves to the revelation and receive church as the gift of Christ as he embodies himself in this world. Paul tells us that Christ is the head of a body, and the body is church. Head and body are one thing.

“Ontology” is a word that can get us past this clutter of functionalism. Ontology has to do with being. An ontological understanding of church has to do with what it is, not what it does. And what it is is far wider, deeper, higher than anything it does, or anything we can take charge of or manipulate. The Singapore theologian Simon Chan puts his finger on our persistent misunderstanding of the church as instrumental, as pragmatic, when he writes, “When it comes to understanding the church, sociology takes over.” The being-ness of church is what we are dealing with. Church is not something that we cobble together to do something for God. It is the “fullness of him who fills all in all” (Eph 1:23) working comprehensively with and for us.

Practice Resurrection: A Conversation on Growing Up in Christ