Journal for living the Bible in a Post Modern Context Russell Bartlett
29 September – 3 October 2008
Monday
The Kansas State University clip was very confronting to me. I know that I have to face these realities, crucial for my ongoing work. This was further cemented with the Gen X’er (Lauren?) monologue. Her statements that she doesn’t expect promises to be kept, and that she’s homesick for something she never had, spoke strongly to me of the need to live with integrity myself, to be willing to build relationships and especially to listen well.
I appreciated the establishment of some theological underpinnings through the exploration of “expanding the box,” and the promise of deeper exploration. I am eager to dig deeper into these.
I’ll need to think a lot more about the DJ-ing metaphor. It certainly provoked some new thinking for me, though I would have liked clearer explanation and demonstration of how all three of juxtapose, subvert and amplify, actually work. The practical exercise with Steve’s sermon, “Christ as representative …” was very helpful and provocative to me at the same time. I wonder about the “weighting” of the cultural and biblical samples, and whether your average pastor can sustain finding a healthy balance of these as Sunday keeps on coming around relentlessly. (This touches on much wider issues – expectations of congregation, gifting, team ministry, equipping others …)
Tuesday
The opening exercise, exploring our post-modernity “colours” emphasised to me the importance of facing the reality of it, with its opportunities, its multiple voices and layers. The great danger for me is to stay safe, “head in the sand”, rather than engage. I am being called to engage.
How fascinating it was to learn of the production of the contemporary Scriptorium. It was very stimulating to be aware of such an enterprise, the making of a setting for the coming together of our culture’s realities (even the Twin Towers were there) with the text. I appreciated that it included a collaborative process of “correct interpretation.” Image and text, beautifully together.
Then came Si Smith’s 40. The balance, this time, of spoken word and image, quite drew me in. There were things happening for me that I suspect were not intended by the artist (like the reminder for me of empty tomb, as we peered into the cave that Jesus was about to enter.) As Si says in his interview: “Good art make room for the spirit to blow.” And that it is “subversive … revelatory … (it will) unsettle you. And these are all the things that Christ did.”
I loved the experiences of living the text in community, both Steve’s working our Christmas passage with us and later Brian McLaren’s modelling. These encouraged me greatly, to do it more myself, as I saw afresh how God speaks through the communal process. The word is the focal point around which the 3-D pendulum course of our souls swings. God is in the movement.
Wednesday
Here was another way of engaging with the text which captivated us all. “Godly Play” was a way of telling a Biblical story, with the drama unfolding literally before us. I appreciated that the process was easily transferable, and that the three key questions provide the potential for taking the participants into real sharing.
The input on “environments speak” furthered the message! The illustration of Pentecost at Opawa was powerful. We could see how it works! The Creator of the senses communicates through and to our senses.
The discussion about sustainability was very helpful, placing this whole exposure to “living the text” into a realistic context.
The possibilities of “takeaways” was another stimulus, very do-able.
I found the idea of the Good Friday service in the notes extremely compelling.
And I appreciated the final exhortation to see what we’re exploring in the light of imago dei – Please, more discussion and exploration of the meaning of this fundamental starting point.
Thursday
Having seen the movie Vantage Point fairly recently, I found my imagination going to work, considering how the text could be explored using differing perspectives. This led to reflection on the role of a pastor – pastor as equipper/empowerer. I’ve been reflecting again this week on Colossians 3:16, the indwelling of Christ’s word coming via the teaching/admonishing done by one another. I appreciated that the particular role of study/exegesis was not being denigrated – far from it – but put in the context of the necessity of various voices being heard for the fullest richness of encounter with the living word. So a pastor’s leadership role is to work at enabling all the voices to be heard, while also contributing their expertise and insight.
A further spur at this point was the presentation of imagination as having both poetic and ethical dimensions. This presented to me a further “growing edge”. ‘Poetic’ I’m somewhat familiar with, but to work imaginatively with the ethical possibilities I found quite challenging, especially in the post modern “labyrinth of mirrors.”
I enjoyed the whole of the input on story telling, especially the learning through the experience of the community. The reminder to “vary the diet” with respect to the balance of text and human story was very helpful.
Friday
In some ways, today’s input came through to me as a preaching workshop. The value of it for me was in the exploration of how creativity is nurtured (especially reflecting on what works for me, and thus the resolve to do it more), and the potential power of the communal dynamic.
The experience of the presentations by the class was a strong affirmation of the applicability of the week’s teaching, such a release of creativity in community, multiple ways to engage with the text.
Summary thoughts
There was a dynamic of building some sense of community during the week. Yet it was constricted by a degree of artificiality, being thrust together in a time-limited class. What was modelled in the teaching methodology, and the repeated return to the one text, has fired in me the vision of building a community around the Word where many entry points to engagement and encounter with Jesus and his Kingdom’s work/mission could happen in the context of the ongoing real relationships and experiences of a group who were committed to such a life.
Many other diverse thoughts and questions in my own mind have been triggered: for example, how “living the text” might be worked out beyond the main church gatherings; the place of doctrine in this way of journeying; how to train others to lead others in living the text?
Much stimulus, much to learn, much to explore.
11 comments:
Hi Russell,
Thanks for your honesty and deep thoughtful insights here Russell!! I agree with you that the week was a rich experience and there was so much to take from it. I particularly enjoyed your comments about DJ’ing and how you questioned the ‘weighting’ of cultural vs biblical samples and the sustainability of this on a Pastor who preaches each week. As I have thought about this more, my mind went back to Jonny Baker’s1 encouragement and some of his practical helpful suggestions. He gave many suggestions from being creative, to preaching less often, to building a team of people around you, to using storytelling, just to name a few. But overarching this is the concept of ‘less is more’. I’m encouraged that is we begin to think in a new way and don’t try and manufacture it or control it, but simply bring our congregations along the journey of asking questions with us, then we will have more of an opportunity to build sustainability and have the confidence to take risks and learn the right biblical/ cultural samples when communicating. Keep up the open and honest approach to your ministry – your authenticity shines through.
Blessings, Mike
1 Jonny Baker, “Preaching – Throwing a Hand Grenade in the Fruit Bowl. Something has to change,” http://jonnybaker.blogs.com/jonnybaker/text/Preaching.pdf
Response to Russell Bartlett’s Blog
I’m glad I’m not the only one who was impressed by the creative vitality of the Book of Kells and the new St John’s Bible project. However, in a 21st century Australian context, I wondered ‘How transplantable are the above two examples?’
Somewhere in the Course Reader there is a reference to a disconnected post-modern society looking for identity in its roots. I understand why the British and Irish have a re-awakened interest in their Celtic heritage and are reworking it – but is this something which most Anglo let alone multi-cultural Australians relate to? Australia is still seeking its own cultural identity. So apart from art work in one or more of the Aboriginal styles how do we anchor creativity in Australians’ post-modern emotional and cultural yearnings? Are we Australians looking for our identity in our roots?
Our war statuary remembers the common soldier rather than great generals. We revere the ordinary Digger and quiet heroes like Simpson and his Donkey. We like quiet achievers, sporting icons like Don Bradman and humanitarians like Weary Dunlop or Fred Hollows. We respect their genuineness and authenticity. Our myths (as city-dwellers) are of the Outback and our sporting invincibility (especially against the All Blacks!!!)
Response #2 to Russell Bartlett’s Blog
In your Wednesday comments you write briefly that ‘the possibilities of “takeaways” was another stimulus, very do-able.’ This is similar to my reaction especially since I enjoyed our class project. It was a good way of getting past the problem that within a week most people have forgotten what we preached. (McSpadden 2003, p. 141) However beyond being a good idea I found myself wondering how this connected with the overall theme of post-modern ministry.
I found part of the answer in Lucy Rose’s attempt to ‘articulate a coherent theory of preaching’. (Rose 1997, p. 1) Within the community of trust there is the freedom, through the week, for individuals to think through a text outside the hierarchical or domineering views of a formal clergy. The goal of conversational preaching is to nurture the multiple central conversations of the church. (Rose 1997, p. 4) These conversations are both divine-human and human-human, enhanced presumably though reflections, ritual and/or actions to be undertaken during the week. Thus, presumably, one goal of takeaways is to encourage other voices to emerge in conversation, within the context of the priesthood of believers. It invites to the extended ‘sermonic round table the experiences, thoughts... of all those present and even of those absent’. (Rose 1997, p. 6)
References:
McSpadden, C 2003, ‘Preaching Scripture Faithfully in a Postmodern Age’ in E.F. Davis and R.B. Hays (eds), The Art of Reading Scripture, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, pp. 125-142.
Rose, LA 1997, Sharing the Word: Preaching in the Roundtable Church, 1st ed., Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville KY.
Hi Russell.
You asked for more discussion and exploration of imago dei. I haven’t got the whole answer, but I want to contribute the fragment that I am able to get my head around.
Steve Taylor has much to say about creativity being a baseline characteristic on God, and therefore he expects it to be present as a characteristic of humanity. “As bearers of the image of God (Genesis 1: 26),” he says, “we too are to live out the creativity of God.” Such a God-like human characteristic is not to be squeezed out because one is a Christian, or a pastoral ministry agent. Clergy also are creative beings!
I think this is old news, although we are not always good practitioners of creativity and need to be reminded of it. What I think Steve brings fresh into the conversation is the idea of play. God is playful, he suggests, and so the person who crafts worship experiences has warrant to be likewise. However, unlike much of what we call play, God’s play is not imitative, but creative. This interests me, because if we are to truly reflect the image of God we, then, are also called to be creators not imitators. Not even being an imitator of God is an adequate expression of creative living – our calling as imago dei necessitates novelty in our enfaithing activities. Like you, I don’t think that exegetical study should be minimised; creativity is no excuse to be sloppy in searching for who God has revealed Godself to be. But there is room for ‘play’ in the ways in which we exegete. Steve details some of the innovative character of the emerging church in Postcard 4 of The out of bounds church, arguing that the chaos of cultural change has created an opportunity for creative innovation and an opening for fresh theological insights. And there is even more room for playfulness as we discover fresh ways of communicating to others (and to God!) what we have experienced through our exegesis.
It is in the nature of play for us to be unable to know at the beginning what it will turn out like in the end. (Being able to predict an outcome is based on experience; repetitive refining of a process to achieve a desired product is more akin to craft than play.) As we develop an enfaithing experience (for example, a worship event or a sermon) we have permission, perhaps even an obligation, to be playful. This implies risk taking and expectation of surprises. Steve gives a ripping example of this playful experimentation, quoting an emerging church practitioner from the UK:“I think people often did not know what the service was going to feel like until it happened. But people were willing to play around and to say, ‘Well, who knows what will happen if we run this video clip or commercial next to this sixteenth century religious painting and if we play…some weird band underneath it And what will it feel like? Well, let’s try and see.”
The possibility of a marvellous enfaithing experience outweighs the risk of a flop for this community. Leonard Sweet, who plays with words, advocates preaching with multiple metaphors. He admits to not knowing how every metaphor will work. “Sometimes the metaphor you’ve hypothesized will fall flat. But other times that metaphor will come to life and become almost holographic, three-dimensional, in its power as it draws people in and creates a whole new reality out of which people live.” Such is the nature of play! As I read Daniel’s blog, I noted the way in which he allowed himself to play by setting up a tent in the front yard to help people understand the feelings of the Israelite people in the desert. (My experience with tents is that they also can fall flat…but that’s another story!) And Jerome Berryman’s Godly Play is another example of surprising outcomes. Even the teacher has a new discovery during the lesson described.
In your blog, in the paragraph following your comment about imago dei you wrote “a pastor’s leadership role is to work at enabling all the voices to be heard…” As I have reflected on the image of God’s playful creativity expressed in humanity, I think that there is an invitation for the pastor to play at enabling all voices! And at many other things as well.
Blessings,
Ian.
Steve Taylor, The out of bounds church, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 2005, p. 62, 68, 61.
Leonard Sweet, The metaphor moment (Part one), National Pastors Convention, http://nationalpastorsconvention.com/2002/resources/articles/metaphor1.htm
Daniel Lee, dleelvingthebible08.blogspot.com/ (accessed 22/10/2008)
Jerome W. Berryman, Godly play: an imaginative approach to religious education, New York, NY: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 1995, p. 35.
Following what Peter has said in relation to takeaways, specifically the idea of inviting “to the sermonic round table the experiences, thoughts, and wagers of those present and even of those absent”:
Surely the idea of takeaways is an extension of trust to those who gather…and those who scatter. They carry the text with them and have the freedom to share it (or not share it) with whomever they choose. Thus the text, released from the strictures of the preachers’ control, takes on a life imbued by the Holy Spirit. I think this setting free of the text to do whatever God and the wider community allow it to is the ultimate antidote to what Chris Erdman calls taming the text. He says,
When you preach you must never tame the text…The Bible, and the Character whose story it tells in such a wide and wild variety of ways, just can’t be tamed or flattened or simplified or reduced or distilled into some bland tonic or a handful of nifty words that the listener, eager pen in hand, can stuff into blanks on some silly sermon note-taking sheet. No, when you preach you must respect this text more than that, and give it and its Author full room to do their own work.
So a well crafted spiritual takeaway product should be very respectful of the text, because the person taking it away has to do the spiritual work with the passage themselves, and this allows opportunity for the Holy Spirit to fulfil the role of teacher. It also opens the way for the voices of “those absent” (as Lucy Atkinson Rose has named the people not attending a service in which the Word is preached) to join the conversation, both as teacher and as students.
Cheerio,
Ian
Chris Erdman, Countdown to Sunday, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Brazos Press, 2007, p. 49.
Lucy Atkinson Rose, Sharing the Word: preaching in the roundtable church, 1st Ed. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1997, p. 6.
Hi Russell,
I have arrived a bit late into this discussion and have been interested not only in your reflections based on the intensive week, but also the interactions you have had from others. Reading the different responses just reminds me of something that Steve Taylor (2006) wrote in his sermon “in the west...one person doesn’t speak for everyone” but in post-modernity all people have a unique experiences and valid points of understanding. This concept, as suggested by Johnson (2003), is frightening for some Christians, because of their narrow perspectives on what constitutes “truth”. Therefore, I am especially interested in your summary comments about the importance of building community around the word.
From my perspective, the key to building the community of faith that dialogues with each other as they encounter the living word is, as McSpadden (2003:140) puts it, to engage in “that dialogue from the attitude of humility”. No one person has the monopoly on truth (Rose 1997), and as Christian leaders model creative dialogue around the word from the place of humility both we and our faith communities will be richer for the experience.
The problem is, attempting to move our thinking from the established view that the professional preacher has the all the “truth” or as Baker puts it to move from the “cult of the expert to the gifts of the people”. This shift in thinking is foundational before our fellowships will be more fully equipped in the mission dei both inside and outside of our doors.
Bless you,
Tim Winslade
References
Atkinson Rose, L., Sharing the Word: Preaching in the Roundtable Church, 1st ed., Westminster John Knox press, Louisville, KY 1997.
Baker, J “Preaching – Throwing a hand grenade in the Fruit Bowl. Something has to change”, http://jonnybakerblogs.com/jonnybaker/text/Preaching.pdf
Johnson, W.S., “Reading the Scriptures faithfully in a Post Modern Age” in The Art of Reading Scripture, edited by Davis, E.F., & Hays, R. Eerdmans Grand Rapids, MI 2003.
McSpadden, C. “Preaching Scripture Faithfully in a Post-Modern Age.” In The Art of Reading Scripture, edited by Davis, E., & Hays, R. Eerdmans Grand Rapids, MI 2003.
Taylor, S “Participation and an atomised world.” In Proclaiming the scandal of the cross, edited by Mark Baker, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 2006.
Hi again Russell,
I’ve broken up my thoughts into two separate blogs, because they respond to two different parts of your reflection and I wanted to treat them separately. Like you, I was both challenged and taken in by some of the visual aspects of this course. You quoted Si Smith (2006) in saying that “good art makes room for the spirit to blow” and taking another look at art from the perspective of imagination and engagement with the Biblical text was challenging to me.
I don’t often stop to appreciate “good art” (although how we can define good art in a post-modern context is beyond me), maybe that is partially linked to the speed of our twenty first century post-modern existence and its’ pre-disposition to small “bites” of information or time. Or, maybe it is because it is so easy to get caught on that Pastor’s treadmill that Rognlien (2005) depicted. Whichever it might be, I am stuck by Paton’s (2005) comment that art is “enlarged of diminished by the quality of attention given to [it]”. Si Smith’s (2006) work is an example art that is both intentionally and “intrinsically subversive”, challenging my perceptions and getting me to think outside my established thought processes about something that I “know” by using both humour and distortion. Buxton (2007) writes that distortion, abstraction, novelty and exaggeration are used in art to help people appreciate reality. However, no such appreciation is likely to be forthcoming without good questions that move us beyond opinions (Paton 2005)) take notice of what is there and how it might impact and engage us with God’s word and God’s purposes for all of humanity.
Bless you as you continue to push beyond your box!
Tim Winslade
References
Buxton, G “Celebrating Life – Beyond the Sacred-Secular Divide”, Paternoster, London, 2007.
Paton, J “How to Look at a Painting,”1st ed, Wellington, New Zealand, Awa Press, 2005.
Rognlien, B, “Experiential Worship”, Colorado Springs, Navpress, 2005.
Smith, S, Interviews on “40”, Emergingchurch.info Stories, February 2006, http://emergingchurch.info/stories/40/index.htm
I was interested in your question of ‘how to train others to lead others in living the text?’ I think Bob Rognlien (2005) provides a key point to this. His first challenge is that leaders need to realise that ‘lone rangers’ will always be limited by their own perspective and experiences, ‘the key is to break out of the cycle of our solitary…and develop an ongoing and effective…planning process’ (p176). What is needed is collaborative creativity and reminds us that Jesus ministered in a relational small group. Brainstorming creative ideas in groups of people that are gifted differently is potentially very powerful. This process will be most productive when there is an understanding that every idea can be shared no matter how outrageous it may seem, as ‘impossible ideas give rise to other, more reasonable ideas.’ (p184) I think the key is that we don’t try to do it all on our own, and is probably the first major point that needs to be communicated when training others. Rognlien states quite provocatively that, ‘some say they cannot afford the time for these creative meetings; I say you can’t afford not to take time to unleash the creativity of your community’ (p185).
References:
Rognlien, B 2005, Experiential worship, NavPress, Colorado Springs.
G’day Russell,
Your short comment on the idea of takeaways was that it is do-able. Peter’s comment took it much further and helped me with my own thoughts. I was thinking that even though the module was called living the Biblical text the main focus seemed to be how to improve the Sunday service, (still useful), leaving me with many questions how to get people involved in the text the other six days.
We need to disciple people rather than “convert” them. I don’t deny the need for conversion but it is only the part of the journey. Discipleship is more than a Sunday morning event, it is life shaping. Webber says ‘The work of the church …is to train the new Christian in the practice of living in the pattern of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.’ Kimball emphasizes the need for relationship over systems. The use of takeaways can be part of this. Giving physical reminders of a message so it can be pondered upon and brought back to mind throughout the week is one imaginative way that can help. The use of art, stories and websites can also be helpful. If we can take Rose further and facilitate continuing non-hierarchial, expert dominated conversations outside of the Sunday service.
Webber RE, 2003, Ancient-Future Evangelism, Baker Books, p89
Kimball, 2003, The Emerging Church, Zondervan, pp 213-225
Rose, 1997, Sharing the Word: Preaching in the Roundtable Church, John Knox Press
G’day Russell,
You mention the movie Vantage Point and imagining how to use different perspectives to explore a text. Last week I spoke at the local chapter of the God Squad. I started by having some discussion of bikes and we shared stories of various accidents and how the stories differed whether you were the one on the bike or the spectator. I then used the trailer for the movie Vantage Point and how you needed a number of views to get the whole picture. We then looked at the gospels and discussed how your view of Jesus would be different depending on which group you were part of. Many commented afterwards that they had a new appreciation of the character of Jesus.
It was great to draw out of them how they saw Jesus and to share what Jesus was doing in their lives. It destroyed the stereotype and affirmed the uniqueness of the individual and their view of Jesus. My role was not to form their view of Jesus but contribute some of the knowledge to understand the cultural setting and certain turns of phrase in the passages read. As Baker says my role as ‘expert’ was to bring knowledge that would help the community perform the hermeneutics. I suppose this is part of what you say is the role of the pastor as equipper/empowerer.
Rose’s concept of conversational preaching says it ‘seeks to acknowledge a diversity of experiences, interpretations, and wagers, especially those on the margins without power, status or voice.’ This affirming of people’s views affirms their place in the body, their role in hearing from God and their role in forming the body of Christ.
Baker, J n.d., ‘Preaching – Throwing a Hand Grenade in the Fruit Bowl. Something has to change.’ Retrieved from < http://johnnybaker.blogs.com/johnnybaker/text/Preaching.pdf >.
Rose LA, Sharing the Word: Preaching in the Roundtable Church, John Knox Press, 1997
Hi Russel
Thanks for coming and talking to us about "Spiritual direction" at my class last night (Christian Spirituality). It was really good.
Peri
Post a Comment