the new holy crap

Alright, we're going to try to rejuvenate this thing one more fall instead of rashly pulling the plug. Welcome back. Hope everyone had a good summer! Here's the news: We are now welcoming comments from the public. The long-time contributors are still the primary dialogue-thrusters but we are ready to hear from others, should they ever wander by.

So let's remember the ground rules. This is dialogue. Dialogue means respect, humility, grace, and a united commitment to truth that relentlessly involves listening as much as it involves saying your piece. Consider this a good opportunity to learn better what it might mean to speak the truth in love! I don't know about you, but I could certainly use a bit of work with both. May God have mercy, may God bring the holy.

Looking forward to hearing from the old gang of "crappers" and new contributors alike. Welcome to the dialogue! (love, Fear)

Monday, March 26, 2007

I believe...


Creeds offer us a succinct statement of faith. They help us to understand who we are and what we stand for, and they set a standard to help us create boundaries. Creeds help us to...
  • shape our beliefs,
  • affirm our faith,
  • define the church,
  • worship appropriately, and
  • mitigate heresy.
In short, creeds are like the church's swiss army knife...









One of the best known creeds, the Apostles Creed, has stood for centuries as a definition of the Christian church. Other creeds, like the Nicene Creed, were designed to define the divinity of Christ.

Creeds are powerful and succinct. When many people could not read, creeds were a memorable way to summarize their belief system. Today, creeds can act for us as a series of hooks from which we build our theologies. They leave just enough open to celebrate the multiple dimensions of the church while clarifying just enough to ensure that we avoid heresy.

But creeds are far from perfect. They're not inspired (in the same way that Scripture is) and while they may focus on one topic (like the divinity of Christ) other topics get pushed aside. There's little mention of the character of God the Father or the work of the Holy Spirit in the Apostles Creed. And they are old. I like the terms "from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead" and "... the Holy Catholic church" but those terms aren't recognized anymore for what they were meant to portray.

So for this topic, we're not going to discuss a topic; instead...


let's create a new creed... a creed for the 21st century.


Over the next three weeks, let's talk about some of the following things...

In week one (March 26 - April 1) we should talk about the content.*
  • What do we like about creeds. What needs to change?
  • Is there a creed we can build off of or should we start fresh?
  • What topics need to be mentioned and what do not?
  • What heresies do we need to address today?
  • How should it be formatted?
In week two (April 2 - April 8) we should format some specific paragraphs or sections.*
  • Is there a succinct way to state the specific beliefs we want to address?
In week three (April 9 - April 15) we should put it together and work out the kinks.*
  • Now that the creed is all together, are there glaring omissions? Does it makes sense? Should it be rephrased or rearranged?

*The small print: This week-by-week calendar is not a strict rule, just a guideline to give us some structure in an activity that is completely new for each of us. Also, I don't want this to seem rushed. Fear and I might consider extending this post's timeline a bit if we find that we need more time. Fortunately, when it comes to creeds, we can stand on the shoulders of giants. Let's aim to create a creed we can generally agree on and be willing to live by. In fact, we'll post it as "The Holy Crap Creed" when we're done.

Sunday, March 04, 2007

What is Right with the Church?

As the poll indicated, I had a few things on my mind to discuss this time around. All of them continue to be intriguing to me but here's what I'm going with. It sort of incorporates two of the topics I had in mind. It contains a comment and a question. You can comment on the comment and the question if you like, but try not to get totally sidetracked from the question. Here it is:

If George Barna's Revolution is correct, Christians are leaving the local church in droves. These aren't bedside baptists either. They are Christ followers who have had enough. They are channeling their energies into parachurch organizations and such, but have effectively ditched the "established" church. Barna seems to think this is a good thing. I do not.

I mean, I understand why they leave, but I think it is a travesty. I'm not sure what generation they are but I assume they are around my age, maybe a bit older maybe a bit younger. So if my topic this month were "what is wrong with our generation" I would say it is this loss of commitment to the local church. You can challenge this if you like, but I would like to focus our energy on the question:

Why should they NOT give up on their local church? Extenuating circumstances aside (because let's face it, there are always exceptions), generally speaking, why should they stay? Maybe you don't think they should. Go ahead and challenge my view, but then I still want you to try to think of what they'll be missing that they should make sure they get somewhere else. Basically:

Why commit to a local church? What does it have going for it? Give theological answers or specific practical ones. The topic is ecclesiological:

What is RIGHT with the Church?