share this page
RSS
Twitter
printAsking the Beautiful Question
Reading the Bible through the eyes of outsiders can awaken the church from numbness.
Christopher J. H. Wright began this series of Global Conversation essays with an exposition of the Lausanne Movement's driving definition: "Evangelization requires the whole church to take the whole gospel to the whole world." What does that gospel look like when it invades the margins of the world, sectors where our more traditional churches don't often go? To catch glimpses of that gospel in action and to understand the biblical themes that can animate ministry at the margins, we turn to Joel Van Dyke and Kris Rocke of the Center for Transforming Mission in Tacoma, Washington.
The psalmist asks, "How can we sing the songs of the Lord while in a foreign land?" (Ps. 137:4). It's a beautiful question springing from the heart of a poet struggling creatively to live out in a strange land (Babylon) what he knows to be true in another, more familiar context (Jerusalem). English poet e. e. cummings once wrote that the beautiful answer is always preceded by the more beautiful question, and in this psalm we discover a beautiful question. It has given theological roots to missional communities of grassroots leaders in six countries throughout Latin America (as well as in urban centers in the Caribbean, Kenya, and North America) under the banner of the Center for Transforming Mission (CTM).
We are learning how to read the Bible not to or even for those we serve, but with those we serve—those who have been wrongly labeled the least, last, and lost. Sustaining this approach is the belief that grace is like water: it flows downhill and pools up in the lowest places. We are learning to see God's grace pooling up in places of extreme poverty and violence.
The core theological values of CTM are formed by the incarnational mission of Jesus Christ. In Jesus' incarnation—and here we mean all that Jesus did and said, including his death and resurrection to save us from our sins—the intimacy of human and divine is fully realized. Said plainly, the Incarnation unites what the world divides—always, and in all ways. It says that matter, not just spirit, matters. Ministry that spiritualizes away the problems we face in the world of matter is simply not true to the biblical picture portrayed in the Creation and the Incarnation. Biblical, incarnational ministry is radically holistic. It touches the body and the soul. It calls forth personal transformation and systemic change. It invites righteousness and justice. It connects God and humanity, heaven and earth, and, perhaps hardest of all, "us" and "them."
Read More
Displaying 1–5 of 9 comments
See all comments
Clinton
Absolute rubbish! Another example of anti-Christian bias and the suggestion that Christians don't understand marriage. I wonder if Gilbert has any references for her view that the Church didn't consider marriage holy or sanctified for 10 centuries...especially considering the fact that the historic Catholic and Orthodox Churches have always considered marriage a sacrament. She only betrays her ignorance of Christian theology - marriage and all other relationships are temporal in light of one's relationship to Christ. That's what Paul is saying and what Jesus Himself meant. However, marriage itself is "holy" because it signifies and incarnates Christ's relationship with the Church. Gilbert's research seems flimsy and its sad that people like her have an impact on an America increasingly theologically-illiterate and unChristian.
muse
I am appreciative of the fact that the writer cited two problematic areas for Christians, but didn't go into great detail. We're not such idiots that we have to have everything explained for us.
Arusha
I agree with the two comments above. Far too many Christians sweep thier fundamental beliefs under the carpet as though these views are right. (many are based in New Age Philosophy) which slam dunks the Cross of Christ and true Grace. We must continue to study the scriptures, pray and seek to have the True(biblical) Jesus here. thanks
Steve Skeete
I must agree with Ted Hewlett that the reviewer was rather cavalier in dealing with two very significant issues the author raised, the one relative to christianity not seeing marriage as holy or sanctified for approximately ten centuries, that is 50% of its existence to date, and the other the author's take on homosexual marriage. In fact, the reviewer seems to be just reporting the facts of the book without bothering to voice any contrary opinion at all. This leaves the review sounding more like a commercial for a book he genuinely admires. Such nonchalance is merely additional evidence of how secular culture is not only "dumbing" but numbing the church into a docile acquiesence.
Ted Hewlett
This review is remarkable for what it does not remark on: for example, the statement, "For approximately ten centuries, Christianity itself did not see marriage as being either holy or sanctified . . . ." Surely a review in a Christian publication should pose some challenge to that remark, in view of the New Testament's comparison of marriage with the union between Christ and his church, and indeed the ideal sanctification of all legitimate human relationships. Nor is her approval of same-sex "marriage" commented on, an omission that leads the reader to assume that her having this view is not something objectionable, or at least something relatively unimportant (a view that is gaining surprising acceptance among the smart set of the Evangelical world.
Submit Your Comment