Brian McLaren's Symposium in Ottawa, Canada (part 2 of 2)

In the second day, Brian McLaren went on to make more direct comments about what church and Kingdom have to do with the historical changes he mentioned the day before. He went on to give examples as to how Christians may 'cross boundaries' in acceptance and even embrace of other practices. He showed 4 quadrants with Evangelical / Liturgical / Social / Charismatic labels, hinting that one person may embrace practices from all quadrants. Brian suggested that the church needs to conceive their gatherings as a means for stimulating 'exercises' among believers so as to enable them to do God's will in today's world. These 'exercises' are 'practices' and rituals that may be performed during the gatherings and throughout the daily activities of the person. He mentioned 1. Inconvenience (from what I understood, he meant 'pushing people to the limit, beyond their comfort zones), 2. Association (If I remember it he meant helping people create associations with other people. I can't quite remember, but I don't think he meant here to use associations as icons that link ideas in the worship.) 3. Speed (I can't remember what he meant by that), 4. Hospitality, 5. Public prayer, and 6. Attentiveness.
I had the opportunity of asking a few more questions the second day. The first question began quoting Jesus when he said "My kingdom is not of this world." (John 18:36) to Pilate. The question was pretty much "Is it the message of the gospel delivered in its entirety if I go on doing 'only' good social acts? " Brian went on to explain how Jesus meant that his kingdom did not agree with the worldviews and values of the Romans. When trying to address more directly the question, Brian (quickly) said that he makes no distinction between the 'spiritual' component of the message and its 'social' component.
The second question related to "us versus them". That is, the apparent distinction in the Bible between believers and non-believers. I and my friend could not understand Brian's answer. He kind of hinted that ecumenism is beautiful, but that was it.
I didn't have to ask question 4. It was apparent by his comments that Brian MacLaren sees that a place to worship on a regular basis is important (perhaps not 'important' but necessary?)
Brian's view on eccumenism goes more or less like this: if he can bring anyone closer to Jesus that's a good thing. I agree with that. I know I may be labeled as a dualist, but my problem is that I still see Jesus as 'the only way'. And no matter how metaphorically or phylosophically the person may interpret 'Jesus' and 'only way', there's still some notion of exclusiveness and distinction. Dialog is good, respect for the other is good, learning from the other is good, networking with the other is good, not imposing my ideas on the other is good, helping and loving the other is good. But you see, it's still the other. I appreciate where Brian is coming from: he's in a country full of bad Fundamentalists. We are in an age that many people say bad things about other people's theology. The other side of the coin is that people are even reluctant at times to identify differences. I think his view on ecumenism still compromises the gospel a great deal. I may change my position in the future... But no problemo, many of his ideas are great.
Brian MacLaren at one point (after commenting about the modern ideas) drew a diagram of the modern worldview of the individual in relation to the church and 'the universe'. It was a diagram where the self was the centre. He then presented an alternative, where the 'universe' is just there, and 'things flow' from the individual to church/world/universe. He went on to comment on how people really look at their needs first very often. One example is people that say 'I had to leave church (fill the blanks here), because I wasn't being fed there". It's so true, and a really sad reality.
Gustavo's first insight: it is ok to be a Baptist and morph that way. Even though I don't quite agree on his view on ecumenism, I appreciate Brian's respect for 'the other'. Brian even complimented good things in the seeker movement twice (with disclaimers, of course). So, inheriting the Scriptural zeal can be a very good thing, but Gustavo thinks Baptists still have a long way to go.
Gustavo's second insight: associate and network with fellow Baptists (BCOQ from Toronto more specifically). Support and identify new local leadership that will carry forward new ideas and initiatives.
Kind regards ! / Aquele abraço !

Gustavo Frederico

Brian McLaren's Symposium in Ottawa, Canada (part 1 of 2)

It was a very good symposium by Brian McLaren here in Ottawa.

It was a symposium organized by the Anglicans. Brian McLaren was the main speaker. It took place September 28 and 29, 2007 here in Ottawa, Canada.
I was very glad to meet some new Anglican friends. Rev. Robert Davis was very kind to allow me and my friend Sidney G. to join the symposium. The venue was just perfect: tables of ~7 people, perfect sound and so on.
The whole symposium was a service (Eucharist). It began with music, went on to prayers and Scripture reading. Brian MacLaren had two main talks Friday and two main talks Saturday.
I'll try to summarize some of the thoughts brought by Brian McLaren.
He joked he would summarize the 'History of mankind' in 8 minutes :) That is to say that he identified what he called some abrupt/discontinued changes in society. These were either because of technological changes, or social changes. His thought is that during of immediately after these abrupt changes the church and theology deserve to change as well to maintain its relevancy and relationship with the world. He mentioned the 'invention' of writing, the invention of the press and, more recently, the Internet.

He went on to characterize the time of modernity and reason (after the Industrial Revolution), mentioning the main scientific rationale and philosophical advances of the time.

He didn't quite precisely define post-modernity, but mentioned that we are living now times of great change in the world and very fast changes. The firs talk Friday was mostly an introduction. After the second talk he moved on to talk about how he interprets how the church related to this History. He classified them into some sort of 'flexibility in hierarchy' criterion, begining with Catholics, through Anglo-Catholics, to Anglicans, to Lutherans, Presbiterians, to Baptists, to Pentecostals, to 'fluid/micro' churches (I can't quite remember the terms). And, of course, from an American view, he depicted two ways: liberal and conservative. Brian went on to advocate for a 'via media' that flows in-between liberals and conservaties.

It was between breaks that I had a chance to pose him a question. The question was: imagine a church with about 40 people. With new members, new christians. They probably have in them the potential to lead change so that the church is relevant in today's context, but these people are not probably aware of this potential. How to move forward? I was hoping to draw upon Brian's experience, knowing that he travelled a lot in the past years, speaking to all sorts of organizations. His hint was that established churches (affiliated to conventions) tend to move forward by immitation, whereas new 'churches' move forward by direct innovation. I have some hints of willingness of the Canadian Baptists (CBM) to engage in relevant discussion. ( One hint was that some high-level pastor from CBM mentioned the book Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Culturesby Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger in of the Baptist magazines. And another important hint is the partiticaption of Dr. Leonard Sweet as the keynote speaker at the Baptist Convention of Ontario and Quebec (BCOQ) in Toronto, 2007). My takeaway was to walk closer to BCOQ and the Ottawa Baptist Association.

Friday's supper was very good. They assembled a bar (yes, a bar!) with wine, beer and other liquor, so that folks could buy it for their supper. Every table had wine! I don't know why I was impressed... I have no theological problems with it, of course. I guess I'm just not used to seing it. At the table, the two Anglican ministers were very surprised to see us, two Baptists, drinking wine. We said we were 'good' Baptists :) Mind you that they mentioned 3 times they were surprised with a drinking Baptist... One of the Reverends said to us: "I think as Anglicans we can't even be ordained if we don't drink wine!" The other interesting comment came later on from the other Reverend, who said that "I think you Baptists got it right with regards to Baptism by immersion". Anglicans still perform pedobaptisms (baptisms of children).

I'll comment the second day in another posting.


( The folks in our table. Anglicans and Baptists drinking together)

Questions to Brian McLaren

I'm writting down the questions I intend to pose to Brian McLaren ( http://www.brianmclaren.net/ ) tomorrow.

1- Jesus prayed "your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven". And Jesus said to Pilate "My kingdom is not of this world." (John 18:36) Is it the message of the gospel delivered in its entirety if I go on doing "only" good social acts? If Christians are to include 'spiritual' good news when proclaiming the gospel, what are the 'spiritual good news'? Are these news relevant and do they speak to people now-a-days? Is the good news that when they die they will go to heaven?

2- This is a question related to "us versus them". In Matthew 25.33 Jesus says "He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left". Acts 5.13 says (commenting about Christians) "No one else dared join them, though they were highly regarded by the people". We have baptisms that are public statements of change in direction. And Paul speaks of "being a new creation". And so on. It seems that it is a division between believers and non-believers in many texts. What do you make of this distinction?

( In Mark 1.15 Jesus said "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!" )

3- Is the great commission a mandate to proselytize? Should churches grow?
Is it a healthy objective for a small church in Canada to grow in numbers?

4- Jesus went every day to the temple courts (Matthew 26.55). I understand that today the world is very different from back then. Does it make sense to "go to church" today? In your experience, what is the importance for Christians (and others...) to have a place and time to worship together regularly now-a-days?

5- If I tell my pastor tomorrow that "Everything must change" he will be reluctant to agree and will begin to worry for his position. Suppose you were in a historical or evangelical church in Canada of 40 people, mostly seniors, without a pastor and searching for one. Suppose there is some willingness by some 'to change', even though they don't quite know what to change into. Where would you look for one pastor? In your experience and considering what you have seen, what are some of the practical options for leadership now-a-days?

Brian McLaren no Canadá (e 2 brasileiros por perto)

Olá, pessoal,
O Brian McLaren ( http://www.brianmclaren.net/ ) estará aqui no Canadá semana que vem, dias 28 e 29 de Setembro de 2007. Brian McLaren é um dos expoentes da conversa emergente. Ele estará em Ottawa num simpósio dos Anglicanos. E o Gustavo e um amigo estarão lá também. Serão dois dias de interação. Eu vou estar compilando uma lista de assuntos e perguntas. Não sei se vou ter a oportunidade de conversar sobre elas. Sei que meu blog entra em pelo menos um blog roll brasileiro emergente. Você meu amigo que está lendo esse blog post tem assuntos e perguntas? Mande pra mim. De repente eu tenho a oportunidade de pôr na compilação. Mas não dá pra prometer nada. Nem sei ao certo como vai ser o ambiente. Você pode pôr os assuntos e perguntas nos comentários desse blog post, ou mandar direto pra mim por email. Meu email: u9x3n_15so arroba hotmail ponto com. Ou clique aqui: mailto:u9x3n_15so@hotmail.com
[]s