Frank Viola and Re-Imagining
I attended Frank Viola’s “Re-Imagining the Church” conference held just outside Toronto, Ontario, Canada, in my hometown of Newmarket, last weekend. I took advantage of it being there and had the opportunity to visit my family. I want to thank Frank for personally inviting me. Even though I am not directly involved with the house-church movement which he espouses, he still thought it would be worth my while to attend. And it was. I’m glad I went. I want to try to articulate a few observations I made about the conference. Please forgive the fact that this is not a professionally written essay, but a quickly jotted observation I wish to share with you.
It was sold out with 200 registered. It took place in a very comfortable, plush sanctuary with state-of-the-art audio-visual equipment. We were seated at large round tables with approximately 10 people per table. I didn’t know anyone. It was a little awkward for me, but I sat at a table and introduced myself as best I could. I made an effort to say hi to Frank since he was so kind as to invite me. We’d never met except online. I’ve received some free copies of his books and reviewed one or two on this blog. He is very friendly, kind and has a warm sense of humor. Viola is obviously passionate about Jesus and his body, the church. There were a couple of times I felt like I was at a good ol’ Pentecostal revival meeting. I admired his passion and his zeal for the church. I also admired… and I told him this… his team of several men who showed incredible comraderie with Frank. I told him it must be wonderful to have such a group of strong supporters with him at all times. He agreed. I think that shows wisdom. It also shows that he is a team player, and that is often a good thing.
Something happened to me that was both uncomfortable and humorous. At one point we were to go around the table and introduce ourselves and talk about our own story with house-church. They started to my right and went around the table, so I was the last one. They talked about their negative experiences while in the institutional church and how they were either trying to find a house fellowship to be a part of, or trying to start a house fellowship, or being involved in one already. They talked of the benefits of not having authority figures, hierarchical leadership, brick and mortar buildings, paid staff, set meeting times, impersonal services, and all the rest. They had success stories of how things were going in their house-churches. Then it got to me. I said, (more…)
If you liked this post, or would like to use it, please buy me a beer!Dialog and Love
How can Billy Graham, a southern Baptist evangelist preacher, sit down with Robert Schuller of the Crystal Cathedral, and say that he’s sensed the spirit of Jesus in Tibetan Buddhists, even though they didn’t know the name “Jesus”? How can N.T. Wright, an evangelical New Testament scholar, co-write a book with his friend Marcus Borg, a progressive, panentheist, and fellow of The Jesus Seminar? How can Thomas F. Torrance, a Scottish Presbyterian Reformed theologian, win the Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion because of his contributions to the relationship between science and theology, as well as for assisting the Eastern Orthodox Church in its articulation of Trinitarian theology? How can Pope Benedict XVI be engaged in open and friendly dialog with one of Judaism’s foremost scholars, Jacob Neusner? How can Thomas Merton, a Benedictine monk and hermit, who’s writing revitalized the American monastic movement in the fifties and sixties, die in Bangkok while participating in a spiritual summit with Buddhists? How can profoundly deep agreement occur between David Bohm, an important quantum-physicist, and Krishnamurti, a world-teacher on philosophical spirituality, as well as with the Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism?
I could go on and on. But the z-theory has helped me answer these questions for myself. I don’t for a minute believe that these people were concealing their true identities, pretending to agree on the outside while profoundly disagreeing on the inside. I don’t think one party believed they were right and heading for reward and the other party was wrong and heading for destruction. I believe that these people understood that every person has equal status within the free space of dialog and mutual respect, appreciation and understanding.
An online friend sent me a kind warning that I was already familiar with, originally articulated by the Buddha:
While the Tathagata, in his teaching, constantly makes use of conceptions and ideas about them, disciples should keep in mind the unreality of all such conceptions and ideas. They should recall that the Tathagata, in making use of them in explaining the Dharma always uses them in the semblance of a raft that is of use only to cross a river. As the raft is of no further use after the river is crossed, it should be discarded. So these arbitrary conceptions of things and about things should be wholly given up as one attains enlightenment.
I wholeheartedly agree. For me, the z-theory has freed my mind from a narrow, fundamentalist way of thinking and has opened new vistas of understanding and, I hope, wisdom. For me. The theory is just that… a theory. Nothing more. It is just a way for me to understand reality. It helps me to answer the “how” questions from the first paragraph of this post. I’m wondering if its possible that it could help others too. For I believe we are in greater need today than ever before to find ways of dialoging with others with openness, respect and love.
Check out my t-shirts HERE. I’m growing my inventory all the time. And check out my contemplative art here.
If you liked this post, or would like to use it, please buy me a beer!z-theory under development!
Here’s a little more meditation of my z-theory. I realize this offends some who would prefer that I stay within the narrow parameters of a specific doctrine, but I am pressed to attempt to articulate that which I’ve seen. Even some of my friends say I’ve lost it and need a sabbatical. I won’t deny that. I might be wrong. At least half wrong. But, as we all know, there are risks involved in straying from the herd. I want to discover as much as I can before I get caught.
There is the Pre-Revealed. This is the One that is not known, cannot be known, and will not be known. This is total and unprovable mystery. Evidence might be gathered, but this Mystery will not be captured. When we speak of this One, surely we don’t mean what we say. The word is not the thing. Neither is the thought. This is the Unnameable. I am interested in communing with this One, the Beautiful Beyond. But I am not only prevented by my brain’s unwillingness and inability to think beyond its own self-securing agenda, but I am obstructed by the Beautiful Beyond’s refusal to be had. This is the upper arm of the z.
There is the Revealed. This is the gracious desire to commune with all things. This is the incarnation. This is the condescension. This is the transmission. This is the revelation. This is the coming down. That is from the top end. From the bottom end, it is the understanding, the receiving, the accepting, the willingness to commune with the Beautiful Beyond, the Absolute, the All-in-All. This is the going up. This is the slanting arm of the z. It slants down backward because it is retroactive, indicating that this has always been the intention and the action of the Absolute. It slant up forward because we enter the fullness of time.
There is the Post-Revealed. This is the bottom arm of the z. It is like a dam broke and a river torrent was released, the force of which has forged a deep gorge through which the river courses. We are in the gorge. We are downriver from the moment of the Revealed. We are past the historic impact. We live in the fullness of this, and still somehow this is an Eternal Source that precedes us. All bathe in this Mystery that is somehow fully within us, that we are fully within, but which still has Being beyond us. This is the Beautiful Beyond that is now not an invisible separated entity, but observable, experienced and known in the love between all beings.
I hope this is helpful to someone.
Check out my t-shirts HERE. I’m growing my inventory all the time. And check out my contemplative art here.
If you liked this post, or would like to use it, please buy me a beer!z-theory divisive
I am in Newmarket, Ontario, Canada, taking in Frank Viola’s Re-Imagining the Church conference. It also happens to be my home town, so I’m staying with my family and enjoying them. My nieces and nephews are a delight. My brother and sisters, mom and dad, everybody… it’s great to just hang out and laugh.
Yesterday for lunch my son Joshua and I went down to Toronto and met Karen Padgett, a Fluevog director. We’d never met before but communicated online. Mutual friends. She picked up some of the reverberations of my struggle from some comments I made on Facebook one day, opened up a communication with me, and has been an incredible source of encouragement and wisdom ever since. Lunch at Milestones was a delight. We’re now friends for life.
My z-theory caused a stir! Didn’t it? I expected it would. I don’t cause stirs on purpose. I write what I’m thinking about and inevitably it upsets some people. I frustrate and confuse, I know. I don’t mean to. I experience this in my own community. Like I’ve said before: we are such a wide diversity of people, and I appreciate that. I’m thankful for it. But not everybody likes this. Some see this as the preliminary condition that needs to be transformed into the homogeneous community that looks just like them. They see it as the chaos and void over which the spirit hovers that will take shape into their fantasies for the community. Few see it as beautiful now. There are some charismatics who would like the see the church be a charismatic church where charismatic manifestations define who we are. There are non-charismatics who would prefer that no charismatic manifestations take place at all. There are fundamentalists who would like me to take a hard line on gays. There are others who would like to see more gay couples participate in our community life. There are some who would like us to be a “bible-believing” church, while there are others who are searching for a way to be a believer without having to embrace the plenary-verbal view of inspiration or whatever. I could go on.
The point is that, as a pastor, it is my duty to encourage and nurture the whole, not the part. I want charismatic expression, but I wouldn’t want that to define us. Neither would I want us to be defined as a non-charismatic community. I hear the atheists, but I wouldn’t want atheism to be who we are, any more than I’d want our fundamentalism to define us. All have a right, but none have sole right. Do you see what I mean?
But this is frustrating because some people think I’m not taking a stand but am wishy-washy, watering down, compromising, backboneless, liberal, evasive, etc.. I have to endure a lot of pressure from all sides to make me into their own image of what they think I should be. Few see the amount of lobbying that goes on to try to morph me into their fantasies of what their pastor should look like. It takes daily strength to resist these pressures, to reject the fantasies, and to resolutely stand for unity in diversity for the sake of the community.
I think the z-theory is a unifying theory. I am interested in finding ways of illuminating how we are united, and this theory has given me a way of thinking that does this. It is interesting that something that it intended to be unifying can be so divisive.
I will continue cartooning again early next week. Stay tuned.
If you liked this post, or would like to use it, please buy me a beer!explanations
I want to make as clear as possible the motivations behind me trying to articulat the z-theory. The first is that I have struggled for years to create a structure for thinking about reality that is not offensive to my intellect. My intellectual, as well as spiritual struggle, is not new to anyone, including my family, friends, church, and readers. After having a dream a little over a month ago, I felt encouraged to pursue what it meant. Hence, the z-theory. It has brought an incredible sense of release, freedom and joy to my personal life because the shackles of fundamentalism have finally fallen off of my mind… at least to some degree… and a huge burden has been lifted that crushed my ability to think freely, independently and compassionately. I am grateful for this new transformation that has occured in my mind.
Secondly, I have a passion for setting other people free from their own bondages. I am a pastor, and I do pastor a local Christian church, and it is a member of the Vineyard movement. Even though the Vineyard espouses certain beliefs and values, I have emjoyed the freedom to think and act autonomously. And even though I recognize that this z-theory is offensive to some, I believe it is totally within the broad spectrum of what is true. Being a pastor, in my opinion, means caring for a diversity of people. If anyone knows me or has read my blog, they know I am passionate about unity in diversity. There are charismatics and non-charismatics, fundamentalists and agnostics and atheists, traditional families and single moms and gays in same-sex relationships and commonlawers, addicts and clean, etc, etc… I believe I have a responsibility to all of them to pastor them in thier own unique way. I am not interested in requiring everybody to believe or think the same. This z-theory helps me to engage all people and to provide an arena within which all people of all persuasions can dialog.
Like I said, I am passionate about people being freed from their bondages that keep them captive. This theory helps me to do that.
If you liked this post, or would like to use it, please buy me a beer!The Promotion of Dialog
“Faith seeks understanding” (St. Anselm, 1033-1109). Mine is no different. I do not wish to adopt a belief system to satisfy those of the same belief system in circular self-affirmation. In an effort to find a suitable structure of thought to understand what I believe, I have come up with this z-theory. I am certain it is nothing new, but as old as the sun. However, it is a new way of thinking for me that has unlocked the shackles of fundamentalism from my mind and liberated my thinking. I now experience a new level of joy and freedom I have not known before. I wish to share it with my readers because I believe it is helpful.
I am certain that this theory is a structure for thinking about reality that is not offensive to anyone of any faith, religion, philosophy, or non-faith, etc., but in fact useful to all people of every persuasion. Being that I find myself a Christian, and a pastor of a church at that (I’ve been reminded of that many times lately!), I find this theory can be constructive to the Christian faith. I do so for these reasons:
- It is Trinitarian in form: God, God Incarnate, God the Spirit.
- It acknowledges the transcendence of the Absolute, the Almighty, the All Above All… Father, God, and Lord.
- It is Christocentric. God Incarnate, dethroned, condescended from non-Being to being. The only way we are connected to the Transcendent is in the son of man.
- It embraces the Spirit, which is the spirit of the Christ who lived truth, justice and love, which is at work concretely in all relationships.
Philosophical research abounds on the issue of the Transcendent. Debates continue to heat up surrounding the historical Jesus and the reliability of the documents. Party politics proliferate divisions over where the Spirit’s loyalty lies. My hope is that this z-theory, a tentative structure for understanding reality, will promote dialog among diverse groups.
If you liked this post, or would like to use it, please buy me a beer!cartoon: rainbow robe of many colors
Rumor has it that his robe was of a special seamless cloth, a garment that would have been very expensive in its day. But rumor also has it (started by me right now) that it was also a rainbow of colors. Certain colors. Two soldiers continue to gamble for the rights to own this very unique garment at the feet of its previous owner. They don’t want to divide it, like they usually do, because of its value. The soldier holding the robe is curious. He has seen these colors before… in a parade his son was in. What could this mean? Did this man know his son? Did this man wear these colors in solidarity with his son and his friends? He was perplexed, and pondered these things in his heart.
This cartoon and post is in participation with a synchro-blogging project called “Bridging the Gap“, the purpose of which is to share positive stories, ideas, and suggestions on how we can bridge the gap between people on the topic of faith and sexuality. Another way to put it is, “How can we embody mutual honor and respect in our conversations and relationships with those with whom we may disagree on the topic of homosexuality?” You can find other participants and read more about it here.
I wonder about the symbolic significance of such a seamless and colorful robe. Not even that would be divided. And if it was made up of many colors… it speaks to the unity of seamlessness and the diversity in colors. I believe this is possible to experience in community.
Check out my t-shirts HERE. I’m growing my inventory all the time. And check out my contemplative art here.
If you liked this post, or would like to use it, please buy me a beer!the z theory
This is just a rough sketch of what I’m thinking about lately. It has to do with my rather controversial post yesterday. Seriously: this is all in development. I’m endeavoring to discover a structure for thinking about faith. So far this is working for me.
Check out my t-shirts HERE. I’m growing my inventory all the time. And check out my contemplative art here.
If you liked this post, or would like to use it, please buy me a beer!Trinity. not the movie
Right off the top I ask for your patience and forgiveness as I risk to try to articulate some thoughts that have been dawning on me. It began needing expression with the dream I had about a month ago. It impresses itself upon me, and I had to write something down even as preliminary as this. I plan to develop it for many reasons. One is that I have many friends who have left the church altogether because they’ve changed their minds and no longer feel like they could stay and keep their intellectual integrity. I think that is unfortunate and that institutions are often to blame. Secondly, I have always been interested in ecumenism, not just between denominations, but between different religions and philosophies. This theory provides me with a structure for thinking about religion, spirituality, philosophy and even all of life that is inclusive and universal. So, here goes:
As an introductory summary: “God” does not exist, and this is his choice. “Jesus” is the history of a suffering humanity longing and striving for truth, justice and love. The “Spirit” is the united community of people, the fullest and final incarnation.
God does not exist. (more…)
If you liked this post, or would like to use it, please buy me a beer!Love and Beauty
When I’m going through times of incredible doubt about my vocation; when I’m experiencing a dramatic shift in beliefs; when I my theology is crashing and burning; when I wonder if I took a wrong turn; when I acknowledge my life is more than half over and what have I accomplished; when confusion is the air I breathe; when my mountains fall into the sea; and when I realize that I will use the internet, movies, tv, alcohol, tobacco, or anything in all of creation as a sedative against all my anguish… I realize I have people to love and be loved by. This is my daughter Casile going out to a prom, and her mom, my beautiful and wise wife, Lisa. And there are the beautiful flowers. In the background is the majestic Kennebecasis River that we live on. Sometimes it is only love and beauty that holds me together.
Check out my t-shirts HERE. I’m growing my inventory all the time. And check out my contemplative art here.
If you liked this post, or would like to use it, please buy me a beer!
