Bože!

“Alternatively, if one denomination unexpectedly adopts an aggressive policy of buying shares in another, then the resulting volatility will make it hard accurately to assess the underlying reality.”

Mark Vernon’s essay in the Guardian Online playing with the imagery of possible parallels between the language, dynamic, and psychology of the eddies of spiritual and religious flux is a fun read – and given the often unstable nature of the Indie climate – rather thought provoking.

Here’s an interesting essay about people converting for all the wrong reasons. This time from the perspective of a Roman Catholic pondering the possible effects of Anglicans joining his communion due to the recent decision by the Vatican. It’s a point I’ve tried to argue off & on for some time now here in relation to our own indie situation – for us, by and large, I think that addressing this issue in our setting would make huge leaps towards building better, healthier communities across the indie spectrum.

If you’ve been following my Theo-Twitter stream you’ll no doubt know that I’ve been puzzling over the Western idea of “merit” in relation to salvation for the past week or so. My interest was perked while reading a little book that summarises Western Christian history through the various “crisis” that have brought about change in its history – a neat premise I thought. The book is a bit overly simplistic but had some interesting “factoids” that made me sit and think a bit – this was one of them. It seems that Anselm of Canturbury argued that the “mechanics” of salvation are based on the fact that Christ through his death and resurrection earned über-merit and now distributes that “merit” to believers as he chooses.

I wondered if “merit” was still a part of the theology of other communities and did a bit of reading – and yup – there it is, in one place or another, in one form or another . . . but it seems to me – and this is just at a cursury reading – that this idea is . . . well . . . apalling! As I say, I’m still reading up on this – it is so foreign to my understanding of the “mechanics” of salvation that I’m having to start from scratch so anyone willing to fill in my knowledge gap is certainly invited to speak up.

Huw has also been thinking about “merit” albeit in a slightly different context and has written a really helpful post on the topic here. After I get my head around this idea a bit more I’ll post on it too – but in the mean time go visit Huw, and if you have some ideas and pointers on this – please, post a comment or two there, and here.

While making my rounds yesterday I fell into this essay “What Do Converts Want?” – written from a conservative Eastern Orthodox position. Reading the essay got me thinking – and asking the question (again) what is it that attracts folks to our OC/IC tradition – that is to say: what do OUR converts want?

Today while making my rounds I found this rather interesting graphic from the Pew Forum detailing the reasons American Christians noted for either changing, or disaffiliating from their denomonation. The listed reasons are interesting – and in some ways surprisingly unexpected. The graphic directly speaks to the question – what do converts want.

It seems to me that if we are to see improved stability and longevity in our communities we ought to be aware of these questions – and some of their answers. What is more, I’m guessing that some of our outreach efforts would benefit from an awareness of, and a sensitivity to the nuances of, some of the reasons for people seeking a new faith community.

I think it is also worth considering these topics because it allows those of us already “in” the community to ask, and reflect on why we are here, what are our core vision and values, and how far are we willing to bend, adjust, or compromise on them in order to accomodate new people in the community.

I’ve learned from hard experience over the years that it is better for everyone if we  bluntly, and unashamedly say, “this is us – this is who we are”, rather than to adapt our language and customs to our faulty perceptions of what the other seeks. When we don’t do this – those committed members in the community feel slighted, or puzzled, and the newcomer is left thinking we are without a spine – and therefore has no respect for the mission and life of the community as a whole.

We cannot be all things to all people – but we can be faithful.