Sunday Revival

An inspiring article…

Scot McKnight shares about living the Jesus Creed. I appreciate that a scholar/theologian like Scot lives his faith. It is reflected in his writing.

Interesting discussions…

In the previous week’s links, there were quite a few discussions about the gender of God. This week I came across several posts about gender roles.

Who made up the idea that there is some vast conspiracy to feminize men and the church, and where is the evidence that this is occurring?

Douglas Groothuis questions the idea of the Christian men’s movement.

The last couple of posts at Abandon Image have been looking at gender roles and equality with most of the input coming from the complementarian perspective.

    Jenny Baker wrote a welcome response about the so-called feminization of the church.

    “We need to allow the difference debate to draw us closer together in co-operation and understanding not enclose us in stereotypical boxes. We need to work to break down barriers, challenge each other towards wholeness and rediscover the complementarity that God intended for us.”

    Church stuff…

    An awesome discussion here on the post, Losing My Religious Security Blanket.

    Some related links on that topic…

    • A thoughtful response by Andy Moore
    • An alternative view which I respect from Susan
    • Additional thoughts from Jeff
    • Valuable criteria for choosing a healthy church from Brad

    On the topic of ugly church issues…

    This is likely only the beginning of the storm to be created by Peter Enn’s dismissal from WTS. Expect to see plenty of discussion concerning the dismissal and the issues surrounding it which have to do with how scripture is interpreted and what is involved in inspiration and inerrancy.


    Just in case you missed this…

    A creative remix of C. Michael Patton’s diagram mapping emergent orthodoxy.

    (ht Jesus Creed, image Blue Like Elvis, original Arthur Boulet)


    I’ll close today with this prayer/song.

    (ht Marko)


    7 thoughts on “Sunday Revival

    1. Great links and commentary, as always. Thanks!

      I have been asking groups of Christians of late whether they find the following two ideas positive or negative: 1) the feminization of the church and 2) the masculinization of the church. With only a few exceptions, most found the former negative and the latter positive. I was deeply grieved that we would attach such a negative value on the feminine, especially where faith is concerned. We have come a long way, but we have so far to go.


    2. Thanks Jamie,
      That is a very interesting question and response. The dichotomy is a set-up for a wrong portrayal of the church when ultimately we need a complete church that reflects the complementary wholeness of both masculine and feminine personalities and giftings. Even stating that we need both can cause a distorted picture because we tend to have such stereotypical, culturally-influenced ideas of what is masculine and feminine.

    3. As for me, I think I’m for the humanization of the church instead of just the feminization/masculinization of it … and I wonder if we’ll only be able to resolve the false dichotomy of the latter if we’ll work through the realities of the former.

    4. brad,
      It would seem that if everyone were fully released to express and participate according to their giftedness, we wouldn’t have to worry about if it is overly masculine or feminine. It would simply be an accurate expression of that specific gathering of the body.

      I used to play that version of the song on the piano, and it amazes me that at 2 years old she copies all of the inflections, especially where she waves her arm for emphasis.

    5. hi grace. yup. totally. while i can understand some legitimate concerns about gender dynamics in content and structures and styles in contemporary American churches, still, if we could get to the core of what makes us disciples who mutually serve the gatherings we’re in, we’d have something.

      some background on my original comment: about 10 years ago, i was invited to a multicultural church planting focus group in San Francisco. with a dozen people, we had represented: three generations; both genders; single people, engaged couples, and married couples; and probably at least five racial backgrounds. as people talked about some of their past experiences (read: difficulties) in churches, and their hopes for the future, it was clear that all kinds of churches have distinctive problems.

      at one point, we were talking about what a healthy multicultural church could look like (no one had seen one). in what i’ve come to interpret as a Spirit-nudged moment, out of my mouth came the idea, “Well, I guess if we addressed all the issues that we’ve talked about here that turned us off to our previous churches, that would probably be a healthy multicultural church!”

      sometimes the healing isn’t about figuring out everything about the distinctive differences – real and important as they are – but what God meant for us as a whole body pursuing wholeness.

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

    You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

    Google photo

    You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

    Connecting to %s