This is so interesting because it sounds exactly like what Liberation theology has tried to do. The values of liberation and equality and justice our huge, but Latin America shows that liberation theologies flirtation with marxism has led to failures of many of these goals.

At the same time it is Pentecostalism that has taken off among the masses. Liberation theology is, oddly enough, elitist in a way, for scholars and those who want to institute their own managed changes, under a new power structure.

As the spiritual emphasis takes a backseat to the political and social, everything becomes gutted of real power and change. It is through the Holy Spirit that we participate in the Kingdom of God and all the signs of liberation that come from it. Otherwise we replace one hierarchy with another, and once again the poor are left out–even if they are once again used as a tool.

pistolpete,
It sounds like you are already on the right track. As the leader of an existing congregation, you live in the tension of maintaining what you have while also having the opportunity to use your resources (you, your building, the talents of your members) for purposes beyond yourselves.

Getting rid of your resources wouldn’t likely be the best stewardship of what is available to you. It is really more about focus and moving forward faithfully in whatever position you find yourself.

While I support expressions of church outside of the institution, I also believe strongly in the ability of existing congregations to implement change as the spirit leads. In fact, I believe that there is incredible potential and opportunity within traditional churches that should be encouraged, not dismissed.

Serving an “institutional church”, there is no doubt that self-prservation can get in the way of organizing for the common good. For instance, looking at the budget, about 50% pays for staff (like me), and around 25% (or more) pays for our property, which leaves just 25% (or less) for other ministry and mission expenses.

So what do we do?

1) Cut staff (including me)?
2) Sell off property?

Such radical approaches are rarely even placed on the table. What we can (and do) do is such things as allow community groups to share our property and see that our staff is actively building community both within and beyond our current membership.

We may not go far enough, but at least we’re moving forward. If we don’t move forward, we’re bound to implode or, worse, drain vital community resources keeping the church on life support.

Maybe RPV.

Andrew,
The missional aspect of the emerging conversation has made this message more familiar to many. However, I wouldn’t say that it is widely understood by the average American christian.

I guess what bothered me most was the black-and-white model of the world behind his narrative: either you buy the “conventional narrative” or you buy his “emerging narrative”. But the world isn’t like that: most Christians I encounter would certainly, implicitly, agree with many of his messages. They may be struggling to put them into practice, but that’s a different matter entirely – he’s not exactly strong on suggestions in that department in any case.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/war-and-foreign-policy

The issues raised by MacLaren in this book have been of concern in my personal life for a number of years now. My family is looking at how we can better be a part of Kingdom justice. However, like you, I do not believe this is a political issue and would have the same concern as you about a Religious Right equivalent.

I would really like to read a book that wholistically addressed the justice, material, spiritual issues that we face. There is no doubt that evangelicals need to be as concerned with justice as with so-called “salvation” issues.

One thing that gives me great encouragement is the fact that the young university students I am around who are followers of Jesus seem to naturally gravitate this way. Many times they are an example to me of changes I need to make in my life.

Thanks for the review…..