I just found something on a blog that I have been passionate about. It's the idea that's gaining somewhat of a reputation and is named Ancient Future. It is the idea that our postmodern world greatly resembles the ancient world where the Church was born. Because of that, it is best to look not only to the roots of our tradition (that being Evangelical in general, Pentecostal, Mennonite, Anabaptist – whatever), but to the early Church.
At first we think, "Well, isn't that what my tradition has been trying to achieve all along?", but then we don't even bother to look backwards, and blow the horn of just our tradition as if it has all the answers. OK, that might be exaggerated, but you get the point, right? We don't look at what world they were trying to serve. We don't look at what they were trying to accomplish. Oh, and sometimes we look at what the Church was trying to do, but we hardly try to look for parallels between what they and what our Lord, Jesus Christ did.
OK, it seems that I spilled quite some beans that I might need to gather later, but the point is that because of the similarities between the ancient and the postmodern world we can learn from them more then from our predecessors just a little while ago.
This is the issue that was discussed in a recent conference entitled Ancient Evangelical Future. Destert Pastor has been blogging about it. He's got clips from it. Why don't you take a look at it and respond to the idea in comments. But look first. This is the last post. Work your way back.
5 comments:
Thanks for breaking the ice Simonas. I think you have raised an interesting topic. I remember from your blog that you had Webber's books on the Ancient-Future idea. While I have two of the three and have only read one, I believe he and others like him are on to something. The parallels are too numerous to discount.
Being a missionary, I have given a great deal of thought to contextualization, i.e., “Lithuanianizing” the gospel. Not so much as to obliterate it making it unrecognizable as the gospel but neither making it so different as to appear foreign. For me this is the tension that I find most challenging when I think about doing church in a postmodern context.
Not wanting to import a different culture, whether that be my American culture, (since virtually all the literature available on the subject is in English and most of it is from an American perspective, or very a the least very western) or the emerging church “culture” (we must be honest and admit that as much as we resist importing it, this literature brings with it its own “culture” e.g., candles, terminology, style, etc.) is a huge temptation. Now, when we start wanting to add to that whole mix the idea of reaching back to ancient Christianity to find some compatible parallels, I wonder if we don’t run the risk of importing a first century culture.
So for me the issue is not so much about blow[ing] the horn of just [my] tradition as if it has all the answers. It certainly doesn’t. That is why I am doing what I am doing. I am looking for ways to find an authentic Lithuanian expression of the gospel/mission of God. The ancient future concept has some appeal in that it connects us with not only two millennia of church history, but to Jesus himself, as you said so well Simonas.
I went and read the blog you wrote about and listened to some of the audio. I found McLaren’s comments about hymnody very interesting and something that I have been talking to my group about but in a more general way. We (they, actually) need to write Lithuanian hymns! Call them whatever you like. Tell the story, the overarching story in songs, poetry, dramas, etc.
I wish that we could have gone. Perhaps one day someone will blog about a conference put on by Emergent Village-Vilnius Cohort.
Peace!
David
david, this is something not directly related to the ancient future, but to your comment. you mention the "authentic lithuanian expression". i believe this is somewhat of a utopia. because of the mobility and media, cultures fragment. culture is never static and ever changing. take me, for example. having studied in the multicultural environment of LCC and then having lived in canada and then returning to lithuania makes me an odd duck. without a doubt, i bring something home, something that wasn't here before. others travel to ireland, to the UK, the USA, australia, take your pick. kids browse the internet. they see stuff, they read about stuff. their horizons are broadened and influenced. so, what can you say about "authentic lithuania expression" now?
what i would suggest is to keep looking for something that sits well with those who come to worship. they have to be looking at church history and the way God moved in it and learn from it. they - we have to be open to the Spirit of God to listen to where s/he calls us to join the Redeemer in his mission.
i also appreciate your caution about importing the early church culture into our setting. fair enough. however, we need to see not only what sits well with us, but also discover helpful means of forming our experiences and our spirituality in the long run.
Thanks David and Simonas for invitation to join this interesting conversation.
I agree with Simonas. it is really difficult (Maybe even impossible) to talk about specific culture, especially in postmodern context of globalization.
About importing a first century culture. I don't think it's really possible? What is there to import? If we are talkimg about the passion of spreading and preaching the gospel, then i think it is more associated with Holy spirit wich is not conditioned historicaly. Maybe then we want to import the understanding of world of 1st century? then, we have to start from believing that the Earth is flat or somewhat similar to this idea. We live in safisticated, scientifically dynamic world of progress. If Chiristianity still believes it can satisfy this world with its mythological explanations of cosmopolicy and spiritual existence, then i think it will never be considered as serious source of answers.
Merry Christmas
Dainius
Okay. Granted, there is no static culture given the highly interactive and small world we have today. However, if we are attempting to be salt and light in Lithuania won't that look different than say in the US, China, or Africa? Yes, you can speak in generalities about "showing the love of Christ" or "preaching the good news" but how do we adapt that to our context? How will Lithuanians really see the Jesus in us? If we were to dance like the Africans in our gatherings here, the Lithuanians would see us as odd and quite like a sect. So does that mean we should incorporate some Catholic traditions into our worship gatherings?
As to the matter of Ancient Future: Simonas, could you shed a bit more light on what the idea of Ancient Future is so that people who are not aware of what it means could comment more meaningfully. As I said before I have a small understanding because I read the book by Webber. Yet, I wonder how you see Ancient Future working here in 21st century, Lithuania. Perhaps a whole new post on that would be in order?
Dainius, in answer to your assertion that:
Maybe then we want to import the understanding of world of 1st century? then, we have to start from believing that the Earth is flat or somewhat similar to this idea. We live in safisticated, scientifically dynamic world of progress.
This is where postmodernism says to the modern world of science, "so what!" Moderns think they have it all figured out and that eventually all questions could be answered by science. Postmoderns are saying that "We don't believe that is true" and "Why should we believe you?" They are not throwing out science completely, but rather are looking for other sources of meaning and possibilities for truth.
Obviously our world is a quite different place now in the 21st century at the beginning of this postmodern period. However, there are some similarities between the first few centuries of Christianity and the current age in terms of pluralism, not trusting completely the scientific, modern interpretation of the world, etc. I think the idea is that there were some specific things the ancient church practiced intentionally because of their situation and perhaps even because of their understanding of Christ’s commands. Perhaps we can learn some things from their example and patterns. One example might be baptism: in terms of the amount of time after “conversion,” the process of being baptized, the ritual associated with the baptism etc.
What do you think Simonas? Am I on the right track?
Right on the money, David. I will have to put up a new post on the subject. For now, hold on to those last days of Advent and use them well in preparation to the Birth of a Child (who might turn out to be much more then a little child after all)!
Post a Comment