Thursday, August 24, 2006

First of several things today, I think

Not the most informative title, but I haven’t blogged about my time in Canada at the Practicing Resurrection conference because I am not sure what to make of it. I had a good time, met several interesting people, but being around even ecumenically inclined Christian Reformed folk was odd. I did feel a sense of desperation from many of those who were there and so there was a certain paradox: There was the assumption that something had gone wrong in their corporate faith, that is of the Christian Reformed tradition (or whatever tradition you came from) but this was expressed by mostly veiled criticism of the institution of the church but at the same time a clinging to Reformed theology. I hate to write this because I was definitely refreshed in the presence of these people and I think they are asking good questions about faith and life, and yet I felt something was off, something that needed to be affirmed that this group could not bring themselves to affirm.
This paradox is perhaps not far from where I am in fact at with Reconciler and the Evangelical Covenant Church. I look beyond my borders attempting to be of the church and yet find myself in this very young Protestant denomination spending much of my time explaining that I am still Covenant, without much enthusiasm for defending Covenant exclusives. So part of the difference is I feel less of a need to make sure that what I am doing or thinking bears the stamp of a particular Lutheran theology. I find my Lutheran Pietist heritage helpful because I can see the continuities with that which was before the Reformation.
Also, my sense of disconnect may have to do with that I had chosen the conference to take time to begin a study of the seven ecumenical councils of the Church, their histories, theology and canons. After giving the iconography workshop in July I realized that as an iconographer I implicitly affirm all of them and discovered that it is no longer implicit in my self but very explicit as I argued that the Icon is the painted witness of the faith of the Church. As such I decided that I needed to be more deeply acquainted with the councils than the cursory attention my seminary education gave them. People at the conference when I mentioned that I was studying the seven ecumenical councils either saw it as a scholarly and intellectual exercise, slightly eccentric thing to do, and/or were very puzzled that I or anyone would care to study such a thing. And as far as I could tell the organizers and most of those who were there would be solidly Trinitarian and have a faith that in some sense is dependent on all but the seventh, given that Reformed theology does tend to be decidedly iconoclastic. Yet *CINO seems to want to in the very least question the iconoclasm that has lead Reformed and much American Christianity to more or less abandon the arts. They also find no problem associating with an iconographer.
Well, I didn't think I would post about this first, but there it is this now leads into at least one of the other things that are on my mind.


powered by performancing firefox

3 comments:

  1. I hear you. In the last two years, I've become much more devoted to Christ and the Church, and I'm increasingly hostile to denominations and denominational tags when used as dividers/excluders instead of descriptors of theology/liturgy/tradition.

    As such, I'm hesitant to describe myself as a Lutheran, because, well, I feel at home in a lot of traditions that are not Lutheran. My theology (and my religious identity) are Lutheran because they conform, in many instances, to Luther's (or Luther's successor churches) ideas, but my theology and religious identity aren't as they are because I'm a Lutheran.

    I also attend a Lutheran church that has a liturgical bent that is closer to Catholicism or Episcopal tradition than a traditional Protestant one. And yet, I would call us Evangelical to complicate matters. A long comment. Sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jorge,
    No apologies necesary, long comments are not only fine but good. I want to hear what people think in responce to my post short or long.
    But your post really wasn't that long.
    In anycase I think there may in fact be more of us out there than some think.
    So many seem to assume that one doesn't take theology seriously if you aren't insistant on a particular denominational identity. In fairness I have know plenty of "non-denominational" types who have no sense of Church and a disdain for theology.
    I'd be interested to hear also how your religious background fits in here. (that is a not so veiled invitation to post and even longer comment.)

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think it is fair to say that many "non-denominational types" have no sense of church and a disdain for theology.

    That's why I love the word ecumenism, with its etymological implications that we're living in one big house.

    As for my religious background, I was raised a devout Catholic. I didn't attend a non-Catholic school until I went to the University of Michigan for graduate school. My Catholic background gave me a love for liturgy, tradition, beauty, and a belief that solemnity and joy can go hand-in-hand. At the same time, I witnessed first-hand how unjust and divisive that very Church, and any Church really, can be.

    In college, I attended Mass regularly, but explored and eventually converted to the Baha'i faith. After being a practicing Baha'i for several years, I fell away from that faith, feeling that it was not as progressive and unifying as it purported to be. I think that the Baha'i Faith is a truthful faith, but it's one I no longer feel comfortable in.

    In the last few years, initially through praying the Hours, I became a Christian again. I see so much Beauty --the Beauty that is God-- in the various Christian traditions, that I feel elements of a multiplicity of them help approximate an expression of my own. In the end, any Christian expression or tradition that is ultimately affirming of our simultaneously-saintly-and-sinnerly selves, of the Incarnation as union and sanctification of the human with the divine, is one I feel comfortable with.

    ReplyDelete