Something that just occurred to me , as I finished my reading of Pastor John Wright’s article in Conflicting Allegiances (and I don’t mean this as a criticism, but rather as a concern that we don’t seem to spend near as much time mapping the terrain of what we would consider a faithful rendition, existence, and impact as church, as we do exploring what is NOT faithful and what is not quite right). I say this about all of us; myself included. I’ve blogged a blog-ful of rants about “what those idiots are doing” and by comparison, very little to stand in contrast and alternative to that which I deplore. Anmd here I can say that not only do most of us do that, but it also is the pervading theme of those I have been defending like Sojourners, as well as those who I have been warning about (the Religious Right and the mix of nationalism with an “Americanized” morality). It seems that we are not alone in history in this predicament.
It is still another testimony to how right The Church of the Saviour does it that their story is a story of faithful response to call, and telling their story of how things happen as they continue to listen and search together about the shape their calling will take, and what new work is to be done by what new leaders. The narrative that comes from their quarters is dominated by the works happening in their ministries, in their neighborhoods. They are all about describing and embodying the alternative reality they have realized.
I continue to be thoroughly interested in learning more about the ways in which we have been led astray, but I find myself longing for more from those who have opened my eyes to something more I had not noticed ; a way in which I myself had been seduced into a way of relating to the world which is “in and of the world”; lacking in the transformative and the redeeming work of God in and amongst the people of God, the church. I nboticed this as I finished up Pastor John’s article, and realized how it seems to be so with basically all the authors that I am into now. Hauerwas, etc. I find myself needful of a much longer conclusion which begins to describe and suggest the alternatives, and then stops short. I know, the articles and books have only claimed to identify the ways in which we fail to be church. They may even spend a larger amount of time in describing the reasons why the church differs, but lack examples of such.
Maybe all such promises made by books can only fall just short, which itself is the impetus for us to seek it out in the flesh instead of continuing to think about it in an academic kid of way. Perhaps (and I hope it is so, and believe it could be so) these authors have that “imbedded-ment” in a people in their lives that for them needs no narrative in their work. Maybe it is out of the lack of such an embodiment and the resulting lack of significant close spiritual relationships outside my immediate family , of the face to face variety, that I find myself longing for stories and descriptions of living, breathing communities that make this Kingdom of God thing seem so much more real and “concrete”; “in the flesh” and incarnate enough to reach out and touch.
I am thankful for the ones who have endured in thier efforts to preach a church as THE intended context for us to flourish as God intends for us, and to be that “haven” and “oasis” of a humanity that has found its purpose. I complain tonight precisely becuase the way the “holes” were described was convincing me that I wanted to hear a detailed description of what such a “witness to God the Father’s peaceable kingdom that has drawn near to us in Jesus Christ through the power of the Spirit” looks like.
