I often seem to return to the critique of the fundamentalist mindsets of many evangelical Christians (and the Southern Baptists, my alma mater, as it will) because they seem to be the present-day representatives of the “people who killed Jesus”. Not “the Jews” or “the Romans” , but an unholy mix and compromise between the two; between “Religion” and “Empire”. Empires often employ their “court preachers” to “cast the script that theologically justifies the intentions and philosophies and modes of operation of the power structure”, and do the “campaign” to “sell” the idea inj religious terms.

Tony Campolo, himself an evangelical Baptist, has come under fire from fundamentalist Christians for his “theology of works” (that’s the label often given to these “liberals” who are supposedly “watering down the gospel”; theyDO things, and they HELP PEOPLE. The Church of the Saviour has, for 56 years, in the nation’s capitol, worked in the poverty stricken Adams Morgan section of DC (and beyond) to help people get affordable housing (as in Jubilee Housing), given medical attention —such as the Columbia Road Health Services — feeding programs , job programs such as Jubilee Jobs, and scores of other programs that truly fit the distinction of being “faith based”….these “missions” derive from the Church theology of COS that believes that ALL OF US” are called; that we each have a call, and that the structure of the Church exists to “enable” this discernment of call, and to do this “as a community” who are accountabhle to one another” in ways which , in terms of Cluetrain “getting it”, they “get it” that the “Mission” is “conversation”; that the call comes through individuals who have certain gifts bestowed byGod, and that they “discover” these gifts in community as the community helps them to “develop” these gifts, and to discover a “reason for being” for that gift by sounding a call to a specific task that begins to take shape as a “response” to the discernment of God’s reign and their lives.

The fact that this exemplary community is not widely “praised” among the evangelical/fundamentalist Churches to the extent of its impact on real lives in Washington DC (and beyond, as people from all walsk of life and from all corners of the globe, come to visit them and “learn” about the the reason for the things that they have seen and heard”— this is a part of the evidence that causes me to be cynical about the fundamentalist movement. They attack “doers of the Word” because they don’t “believe the right stuff”. For me, the proof is in the fruits. The fundamentalists call this “works righteousness”. In so doing, they betray their preference to “think rightly” over “living a Christian life”.

To seek to encourage and enable the “conversation” which leads to mission and emphasize a discipline of groups of people “called to mission” and to have a structure for upholding the “Inward Journey” along with the “Outward Journey”; the Church of the Saviour advances of theology of Church that places supreme emphasis on the “conversation” in that it sees the “Mission Group” as the key component emerging from the community discernment. Without mission; the “Outward Journey”, the working together on spirtual disciplines die on the vine……without the “Inward Journey” and its groups of people, committed to accountabilty to each other for “keeping abreast of each other” and their spiritual journeys, and exploring together various “spiritual classics” and “contemporary works of theological concern”, without this “inwardness” the Mission is dis-empowered.

This balance as emphasized in Church of the Saviour groups (many of which have spawned new Churches whiech develop various sub-missions) have evolved the Church of the Saviour into a kind of self-contained ecumenical denomination (even though they seek collaborative work and make themselves available as a resource to any demnominational churches who seek them out to discover what it is that makes them tick and what factors eeem to make them successful and effective).

The fact that “when people listen” in the context of others who are gathering with them, for the expressed purpose of “discerning” what a common mision might be, there may be something “confrontive” that emerges, since it is God whom often calls us to “change”; which often neccessitates the challengin and dismantling of structures in which the powerful have vested interests. When “conversation” ensues, and is truly explored, this includes, in the Christian traditon, listening for God in the conversation among us, and through the voices of one another. When we work against conversation, we work against the key avenue for the call of God. The Church MUST be about doing EVERYTHING it can to encourage and enable conversation.

My call, and my role, and my gifts point me in the direction of resourcing the Church’s efforts to enable THE CONVERSATION, via the technology route. This is but ONE avenue among many. It is by no means theonly one, nor is it the most important one, but one among many…and any one of these is important in its woen right. I believe this area, which includes things like Weblogging and Church resourcing and online community; these things are so ful of potential and wide-reaching possiblities. It is disobedience that the Church is not more afirming and cognizant of the gifts being offered in this arena. So many people are being missed; so many gifts lie undiscovered and dormant, and many others, squelched. This is travesty. This is blasphemy. It is literally and truly a DAMN SHAME.