archaelogical piecing: taken from :vision of future: by John

Subject:

Comments:
: :I think at some point Christians will be forced to choose whether they will accept the heritage that is in them, that they always knew deep in their meditations, or retain the superficial framework of broken pieces that they have archaelogically pieced into a system. : John really impressed me by his entire last post. He is talking about reclaiming some type of spiritual reality that the traditions of men have obscured or left altogether. He is a champion of this. He is screaming out for some sort of baptismal seal for all our foreheads! He is screaming out for something tangible and real that flows out of God's truth and not human institutions! Amen! John, I read and reread all your wrote. Pardon me if I am misunderstanding you! When I reread this portion of your last post (:vision of future) I was blown away and I started recalling thoughts and feelings that I have had about modern movements in Christendom--ways we try to garner a context for our own spiritual life. It seems that since many of us are aware that we lack actual spiritual government, beyond the five-fold ministry model, or maybe beyond some 'shepherding movement' ideas, we need to find our connection back to the early church. So, we go at it different ways. The home churches recall the way the early church met in the apostolic times before the basilical structures were inherited by the churches. In those days, the Apostles were the actual church government, in concert with presbyters and deacons and active lay people. Those days the church was engaged and often under the threat of persecution. Beyond government there are issues of the emptiness of modern Christianity. We need some kind of tradition, other than 'dead ritual' of course. The Messianic believers of today hearken back to the Jewish roots of Christianity, often to the neglect of other parts of church history. And what about the huge buzz about 'Celtic Christianity'? Then there are those such as charismatic episcopals and others who have returned to liturgy via ordination through the Anglican and Orthodox communions. Whether those ordinations are valid or not is an entirely different matter not to be tackled here. Some people have found that Francis Schaeffer helped them with making a connection. I think there is some validity there, even though I beg to differ w him about Kierkegaard being below the 'line of despair'. Some folks attempted reconnecting to the revivalist and holiness movements. Then again, if none of these paths work there is always the promising lure of Jewish liturgical dance and banner ministries. I guess what I'm saying is that your post reminded me of the various ways we try to build a context of church history or church identity to place under ourselves to validate or define ourselves, instead of learning about our true heritage. Here is the rub. All of these things came to mind in your archaeological comment. I read it over and over. I think all of these things are good in their own way and I feel that in each of them lies some seed that can help us graft back into that tree of Church history. However, I feel that our error is in our desire to claim them and use them irresponsibly without knowing where they originate or what they point to or how to integrate them. Thanks again for sharing such a great thought with us. : Bill

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: