Wednesday, June 02, 2004

Excuse Me!

Hey, I've run-helped-been the sleepover dad for 5 parties in 6 days. I feel like Martha Stewart, not.
Anyway thanks for all the GREAT comments. Seems larry need some punctuation and one-thought-at-a-time help.
So I'm on to Gareth's post specifics. I'll get to that tonite.

But before I go...

I noticed that the only real negative or truly disagreeing thing on all 24 comments was the fact that I generalized about so many Brits not getting money from the church system, and working at so many jobs. I'm willing to be wrong. That was the way it looked to me. What we can agree on is that even though they may be working for the existing church system, they don't support, defend, or intend to grow the old wineskin. And most US churches, and most para church orgs, still try to support the existing status quo. Go to church, tithe, read and pray. My only idea is what if 20% of the church employees in the US gave 1 hour a week to a new wineskin. It would be a revolution in the making. I know it's a generalization. A total one, but the point gets across.

Till tonite,
Rob

5 Comments:

At June 2, 2004 at 1:22 PM, Blogger bobbie said...

you've got my 'one hour' - where can i give it??

 
At June 2, 2004 at 5:30 PM, Blogger rob said...

bobbie,
ouch! Reality is more like some folks givin it all they got! right?
Rob

 
At June 17, 2004 at 8:01 AM, Blogger Sarah Dylan Breuer said...

I see my own call as both/and. I do a lot of new wineskin stuff of going direct to the culture, which keeps me a little closer to sane, but I also seem called to the church. I resisted the call to the church for a long time, as I really wanted to be out on the margins, but gradually I discerned my vocation as being like the agitator in a washing machine -- called to be in the center to push what's at the center out to the margins and bring what's at the margins in to the center, seeing transformation happen in the process. For me, working within the church is NOT a safe, comfortable, or profitable option; the pay and prestige are much lower than other things I'd be doing, and a person like me challenges a congregation in ways that they're sometimes not very happy about. But it's where I'm called to be.

 
At July 27, 2005 at 11:23 PM, Blogger bj woodworth said...

Well how the hell are you? The scarry thing about this post is can littlerally hear you echoing through my house as I read it and the tone and pace picks up as it goes. This posts kicks ass and I am going to site it on my own if that is cool with you. It challenges the emerging church in the U.S. to be missional first and allow the emergent structures to come out of authentic engagement with our culture. Or to site Frost and Hirsch let our missiology determine our eclesiology mot using thes same structures but dressed up with candles and icons. It has great analysis and posts a stinging challenge to those of us who think we are being innovative and really just spinning our putting lipstick on the same old pig.

I often feel this tension like all I want to do is get as much silverware off the sinking ship before it goes under. And then somedays I see a glimmer of hope that maybe just maybe the ship is not completley beyond repair. Our community for the time being is called to work within the old wineskin, modleling and incarnating a new wineskin along side. It creates deep confusion at times but the people within the mainline churches are just as valuable in the eyes of God as the pagan postmodern culture. Are we not called to care for these people in the dessert? Our particular call is to be a prophetic voice to both. Pray for us as we live and breathe between the missional and the institutional, the new wineskin and the old and death and birth. Thanks for the cold hard reminder, I miss your prophetic honesty.

I will drink a Belgium for ya.

bj

 
At February 5, 2007 at 5:19 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You have an outstanding good and well structured site. I enjoyed browsing through it » »

 

Post a Comment

<< Home