Ecclesia as Res Publica: Responding to ‘Churchless Faith’
9 Oct 2009
Back in July I made a post about my PhD research, that tried to summarise the problem I am exploring and the resources and methods I am using to respond to it.
This time, I stepped away from everything with a blank piece of paper, to try to ’see the wood from the trees’, and landed on something more focused, and shorter, that I’ll be giving the next 3 years to.
I. WORKING TITLE
Ecclesia as Res Publica: A diagnosis of the phenomena of ‘Churchless Faith’ within Consumer and Market Society and implications for Evangelical Ecclesiology.
II. SHORT ABSTRACT
We seek to diagnose the recent phenomena of ‘Churchless Faith’[1] within Evangelicalism, wherein Christians in growing numbers are pursuing a ‘post-Church’ faith journey, and suggest that rather than facilitating Christian conversion and identity formation, this response instead, leads to a converse formation.
We do this by asking how this phenomena might have arisen within the relationship of the Evangelical Church to consumerism and the market, of how the Evangelical Church having focused on mission within these realties with a lack of determinate social structure and ecclesiology has resulted in the identity formation becoming captive to the logic of consumer and market relationships. Christians have become isolated monads, forced away from any community identity construction, and public habitus for formation of faith. We then ask what internal and traditioned resources are available for an Evangelical ecclesiology that might begin to counter this problem.
To address these questions, first, we provide an historical account and analysis of the relationship of the individual to ecclesiology within evangelicalism, consumerism and the market, and public life, second, we ask what authentic resources internal to the Christian tradition are available in response and by what method they might be best appropriated, third, we outline and correlate the resources of three such identified Christian traditions, and fourth, we produce an assessment of current emerging ecclesiologies before making our proposal for an evangelical ecclesiology.
In chapter one, we provide an historical account of the relationship of the development of evangelical church in relation to consumerism and the market, and show how unlike it’s earliest manifestations, later renewal movements did not take on determinate social forms, resulting in a corresponding lack of exploration of polity, which it ultimately ceded to the logic of the market and consumerism. In chapter two, we provide descriptions from social, philosophical and political theories to map the false and alternative realities that have taken captive Christian formation and the church with regard to its ecclesiological imagination, within this relationship.
In chapter three, we ask if rather than these false realities, does Christian tradition have the methodological and internal resources to construct a theological description and evangelical ecclesiology that is better able to fund the imagination of the relationship between the Christian individual and community.
In Chapters four, five and six, we argue that such a description may be made from an Augustinian account of the nature of the individual in relationship to public life, that can be correlated with consumer and market realities, and then delineate this account from within the traditions of Reformed, Anabaptist and Radical Orthodox theology, whilst exploring the implications for Ecclesiology.
In chapter seven, we test our diagnosis against current emerging ecclesiologies to examine how far they are captive or attend to consumer and market identities. In Chapter eight we provide a proposal for an evangelical ecclesiology that might better lead to Christian conversion and identity formation within consumerism and the market.
Tagged: ecclesiology, PhD
31 comments
Trackback
Comment by rodney neill
6.23 pm on 10 Oct 2009
Ah Jason as a fan and having received much inspiration from of Alan Jamieson and Dave Tomlinson (esp his book Re-enchanted Christianity) I sense I will be in a considerable degree of disagreement about your thesis – there is much to respond to. I hope you will post regularly in the future about your current thinking about some of the issues as you work on your thesis.
all the best
rodney
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
8.27 am on 11 Oct 2009
Hi Rodney, I’m a fan of Dave Tomlinson and Alan Jamieson and in agreement with their diagnosis
So it will be interesting to see why you think you’ll be in disagreement with my thesis
Reply to this comment
Comment by rodney neill
6.41 pm on 10 Oct 2009
My first response is negative shaking of the head in disagreement and a wish to counter some of your points! However I hope in future posts you can expand in more concrete detail some of your thoughts and reasons for them so I can understand more and make space for what you are saying.
Rod
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
8.29 am on 11 Oct 2009
Tnx Rodney. I’m making a strong critique of the modern evangelical church and how it has become captive to the logic of the market, but I am also exploring how ‘post-church’ ecclesiology might be funding it’s imagination with the same logic despite it’s aspirations.
This is not an attack on emerging/post church and defense of traditional church.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Paul Fromont
9.22 pm on 10 Oct 2009
Hi Jase. It sounds like it’s going to be a fascinating journey for you. I shall follow it with a great deal of interest, and look forward to one day reading the finished work.
My only reflection, having read your abstract, is an apparent assumption that it is “market” and consumeristic preferences that have had a negative effect on church belonging, i.e. because people are consumers and therefore have choices they are choosing not to ’submit’ themselves to the formative processes of church belonging (I use “church” deliberately, because while I accept that the communal/relational is critical in our formation, “church” belonging isn’t the only context within which we can be formed as Jesus-followers. It isn’t always the healthiest or the safest communal context within which to be formed and transformed).
To the degree that churches themselves have contributed to this “churchless faith” by way of an uncritical embracing of market and consumption (which seems to be to a reality your thesis is attempting to address) my sense is that they haven’t gone deep enough (again, I use “deep” as distinct from “far” deliberately).
My hypothesis: many (but by no means “all” – as Alan Jamieson’s thesis demonstrates) have left churches not because of the market and consumption (choices) but because the church has not sufficiently subjected itself to the critique of the market and consumption. It has therefore not understood nor deeply engaged the role of individual desire, longing and hope in human (trans)formation, nor has it drawn on the deep Christian understanding of desire. It has, I would argue, failed to be a “deep church”, and to the degree it fails to submit itself to the critique of market and consumption, to that degree it misses an opportunity for deep and radical renovation and reform.
Instead it has largely settled for the superficial, it has stayed on the surface (uncritically embraced the market and consumption) but left untouched and unaffected it’s ecclesiology and ways of being church. Consequently it has failed to meaningfully engage the deep questions, longing and restlessness in peoples lives, and to the degree it has failed to do that, many have chosen to engage those questions and that restless of heart elsewhere and by alternative means.
Peace to you and yours my friend.
Paul
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
8.39 am on 11 Oct 2009
Hi Paul, great to hear from you mate, thanks for digesting, reflecting and writing some thoughtful comments/pushbacks.
I’m exploring one possibility, the relationship of the church to the market and consumerism. There are many more I could explore, but that is the one that I have chosen to explore. Also it’s going to be a mixed bag, of good and bad, and I think will show how evangelicals have been able to engage in market economies but also become captive to them.
So I’m going to spend two chapters exploring how might the modern evangelicals church have gotten in bed with consumerism and the market. This is not a defense of traditional evangelical church.
Having made the critique/diagnosis, I then want to ask, academically, how might the best intentioned responses of the post-church movement, still be captive to the logic an imagination of the market/consumerism, and what theologically might better fund that. And that will be a mixed bag too.
Again this isn’t an attack on people leaving church, but an attempt to explore if that impetus is leading to anything better than what it left behind. My fear is much of what passes as post-church is still superficial and given over to identity formation of consumerism and not about christianity.
For sure there are many post church people who will argue that they are not doing that, just as there are many in traditional modern churches who would argue (just as rightly), that they are not all captive to consumerism in that way.
So I don’t doubt the questions and desires, and sincerity of people. I am asking as from an academic perspective, is that honest desire being hampered by the very thing it sought to leave behind.
Within that I am hoping to give a critique of both the church that the post church came from, and the post church movement itself.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Paul Fromont
10.47 am on 11 Oct 2009
Cheers Jason. I wish you all the very best… You’re raising some excellent questions… and as I said earlier I will watch with a great deal of interest, and will no doubt also be cheering you on from the sideline.
I share the “fear” you raise in your fifth paragraph (in your response to my extended comment)… I’m not sure that many post-church groupings or emerging churches/communities are doing any better at grappling with the deeper critique and thus challenge that consumerism invites.
I suspect that it will be in the tensions and contradictions, indeed the paradoxes, that the greatest potential for self-criticism, repentance, re-formation, and new life will emerge, and if your thesis serves those ends I will rejoice greatly.
Go well.
Paul
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
2.46 pm on 11 Oct 2009
Couldn’t agree with you more brother
Tnx for your encouragement.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Steve Burnhope
10.04 am on 12 Oct 2009
Hi Jase. I too look forward greatly to your work here.
Can I just raise a thought, having read the exchanges above?
That is, it seems to me your abstract ‘gives away’ your view on the subject (picked up by Rodney). I am not familiar with the ‘rules’ for a PhD thesis compared to an MA dissertation, but ought not the title/abstract to be a neutral construction, explaining what you intend to investigate by way of perceived issues and concerns, and in the course of the work drawing conclusions (yet to be formed) from the evidence you uncover?
I’m not criticising, just enquiring (and, in any event, ‘tweaking’ it to a neutral stance would not be difficult to do).
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
10.10 am on 12 Oct 2009
Hi steve,
You are quite correct, it’s more a statement of epiphenomena and will have to be changed for a real abstract.
But like all PhD research, I am trying to address a phenomena, and I do think that the post-church movement is as problematic as the existing church and interrelated.
I’ve left the working abstract with the title this way to remind me what I am trying to address, and like all research starting with the conclusion and working backwards, and given the nature of a blog, cutting to the chase might be easier for those not in academics.
I thought about changing the title back to something more neutral in this post, but I’m trying to be provocative. I think/fear the post-church movement is a mixed bag, and needs critiquing, and has more in common with what it is trying to leave than what it is producing.
Reply to this comment
Comment by James Prescott
10.10 am on 12 Oct 2009
This looks a very interesting and, as ever, very relevant topic. Forgive my niaivety, but I’m guessing by ‘post-church’ you are focussing on Christians or even church leaders who are rejecting the idea of meeting in a church commuinity, and say this is no longer relevant in our post-modern culture. I’ve heard you speak against this before, and I agree with you that community is a vital part of our faith, but I was just clarifying, from a complete laymans perspective, what you meant by this term.
I look forward in particular to reading your arguments for how church has let itself be too shaped by consumerism, and some examples of this, as well as your conclusions on the implications of post-modern culture on ecclesiology.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
10.14 am on 12 Oct 2009
Hi James,
I’m looking at a particular type of ‘post-church’ move, the the one that has no particularity, and thinks christians identity and formation takes place through consuming resources in isolation when wanted and needed. I think this model is impossible for most christians to practice, unless they have been in a church for a long time previously and had the training to consumer resources on their own. And this doesn’t lead to new conversion and christian formation, and ultimately is more about forming identity in consumerism and the market, the very thing it rails against.
And this is not a defence of modern churches that are as captive to consumerism and the market. Tnx mate
Reply to this comment
Comment by James Prescott
11.04 am on 12 Oct 2009
Thanks for the explanation, it makes a lot of sense. I think that rather than being an end of spiritual growth itself, that private study and reflection is more useful as a compliment and addition to growth within Christian community. I do my own study and reflection privately, but I would never consider that a substitute for authentic community and discipleship/teaching in that context – indeed, its not what Jesus modelled whatsoever. He in fact modelled the growth in community with his disciples, while at the same time had His own private times with the Lord, which is then exactly what we should be modelling. So I totally agree with what you say.
Thanks Jase.
Reply to this comment
Comment by rodney neill
11.46 am on 12 Oct 2009
jason
There is in any locality a very wide diverse variety of churches from different denominational streams from Quaker, Free Presbyterian, Reformed Presbyterian, Church of Ireland, Roman Catholic, Independent Charismatic are a few that come to mind in my home town. Are there guidelines as to what churches might offer ‘authentic Christian community and discipleship/teaching.’ We are already in the buisness of consumer choice when we choose what church to go to and what our theological perceptions of what constitutes ‘Christian identity and formation’ are. Is your baseline that churches that best do this are evangelical?
Rodney
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
11.57 am on 12 Oct 2009
Hi Rodney,
I couldn’t and wouldn’t want to suggest what is ‘authentic’. I am however trying to be honest to my christian background and pastoral context, which is evangelical.
I am interested in what is ‘evangelical’, how ecclesiology has been captive within my tradition to the market/consumerism, and how emerging ecclesiologies may still be as captive to the market, and that they are forming something other than evangelical identities. I’m not saying they have to produce evangelical identities, but that is what I am interested in seeing. New christian conversion and identity formation.
Does that help clarify?
Reply to this comment
Comment by Anthony Johnson
12.32 pm on 12 Oct 2009
As a Christian who is on the cusp of being post church I find this fascinating. For me I am actively keeping my links to the church community as it is a vital part of my faith. My issue, if you like, is more to do with services. There seems to be an attitude of one size fit’s all rather than looking at how different styles impact people’s faith.
As a teacher I know that I can’t just teach using my own prefered learning style. Instead I utilise a range of methods and styles so that over a period of time I can impact on as many pupils as possible. Sadly this sort of educational thinking has bypassed many Churches and as a result we have the total fixation on the sermon being the sole focus of a service. That works if you are a good auditory learner…and so shouldn’t be dispensed with but what about people who learn in other ways?
I suspect that many people are leaving the church because of similar issues. Until we grasp that we won’t be able to reach out to the vast majority of people who need to hear the Gospel. Jesus used all sorts of methods in His teaching…shouldn’t we!
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
12.48 pm on 12 Oct 2009
Hi Anthony,
Our churches can and should do better with regards to the differences in people, instead of a homhenous approach. The flip side of that is what I am exploring, is the demands of consumer formation that expect everything to be there when and how I want and in isolation from others.
For doing church with others means the possibility of a) it not being what I want when I want and b) thinking about someone else other than me
At least it is in my case.
Jason
Reply to this comment
Comment by James Prescott
1.39 pm on 12 Oct 2009
There does need to be a more creative element to teaching in church. I heard a quote by Rob Bell saying that essentially we need to stop the scientists ruling the sermon (to paraphrase). His argument was that teaching/preaching is an art form in itself, and shouldn’t just be seen as a lecture, someone talking from the front. But its a message that whoever is delivering it can and should deliver in whatever way fits the message, rather than the opposite way round. There is a lot more use of visual arts in talks than there used to be, butI don’t believe this is the limit of creativity in teaching. As you are more creative in your teaching and use a variety of methods – not for the sake of it, but to suit different messages, then it will naturally engage more people, more of the time.
Reply to this comment
Comment by rodney neill
2.18 pm on 12 Oct 2009
//
Jason
In 21 century society I wonder if many Christians have varying levels of involvement/identity/participation in overlapping groups/,networks and movements via contact from personal face to face interaction to social networking which is far more complex that just exclusive membership of one body or church..for example in a typical Ikon service you will get many people who also go to a church service on a Sunday morning/belong Does this not complicate the church/postchurch dynamic that you outline in your thesis abstract?
I sense I would need a deep in depth conversation to appreciate some of the nuances of your position!
rodney
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
2.27 pm on 12 Oct 2009
Hi Rodney,
Maybe we’ll get that conversation over a beer one day
I think we need ecclesiologies that have the varying levels of complex overlapping that you describe, for sure. Again I’m not arguing for church is only a style of modern local congregations, far from it.
It’s loss of any particularity, the notion of formation in community, that worship is political and commitment to something other than ourselves, and forms of ecclesiology that are about the construction of something other than an evangelical identity (again that’s my focus).
What kind of church leads to conversion, and and christian identity formation, and concrete mission, and what kinds perpetuate formation of a life around a consumer/market imagination, that Christianity produces resources to support?
That’s at the heart of what I am trying to explore, I hope/think
Reply to this comment
Comment by rodney neill
2.45 pm on 12 Oct 2009
Hi Jason
I think I understand a bit more where you are coming from…certainly i think the theogy/practice of new neo-monastic Christian communities such as the Northumberland Community might offer one hopeful model to your for question
What kind of church leads to conversion, and and christian identity formation, and concrete mission, and what kinds perpetuate formation of a life around a consumer/market imagination, that Christianity produces resources to support?
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
3.14 pm on 12 Oct 2009
Hi Rodney,
Urban monasticism is one promising avenue, that I will look at, at some point. But it sill tends to lead to small communities, of tight particularity that are difficult for others in complex overlapping spaces to engage with, and does’;n lead to conversion and formation (not that I have seen). But it is a strong contrast with the -post-church’ ecclesiology. I think I’m looking for a via media between the two, and asking the impossible.
In the last paragraph above, you’ve captured what I’m about, I like that very much.
Reply to this comment
Comment by James Prescott
3.13 pm on 12 Oct 2009
I often wonder about this Christian subcutlure that exists with many products with a ‘Christian’ label – music, dvd, books, bumper stickers, t-shirts, wristbands and the like – who all make money the ‘consumer’ way but at the same time are doing their best to seperate Jesus from the everyday, when He wants us to make Him part of our everyday, and take church out and bring the secular and sacred closer together. Not necessarily taking their way of living or culture, but slowly redefining it and doing the everyday things the way Jesus would, seeing Jesus in what is often termed the ’secular’ or ‘worldly’ and living out Jesus values in the everyday instead of consumer ones. Some Christians want us to think everything labelled ‘Christian’ is good and everything not labelled Christian is by definition bad, which in my opinion is a totally warped view. God can be seen in creation, all over nature – sea, sky, fields, plans, animals and living creatures, stars, space and you can experience the Spirit in music which many label ’secular’.
Some Christians or churches today I am sure would label this evil and tell us to run away from it, yet at the same time would promote the values of consumerism in their shops and in their everyday life.
A good example of how these two contrasting views come into conflict is the marketplace at New Wine, which is unashmedly being consumerist in one sense, yet claims to be ‘Christian’ and trying to redefine the culture away from consumerism.
There are clearly conflicts between consumerism and Christianity, and how we deal with living as a follower of Jesus in a consumer culture. We all buy gadgets, cd’s and books – some of which help us grow in our faith and ministry – yet in so doing we are fuelling the very culture we want to change.
A very interesting topic for sure.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Anthony Johnson
5.09 pm on 12 Oct 2009
I suspect Rodney’s comment is very valid. Social networking and the internet do give people access to a ‘wider’ church than just the local community. I certainly find it very beneficial to network with as many different Christians as possible.
As for the consumerism aspect..I worry about that one. I have heard some people use it as an argument that no matter what I must go to my church’s services..otherwise I am pandering to a consumerist society. Is this just an excuse to avoid answering difficult questions?
I suspect, as mentioned by a previous poster, Rob Bell may be right…we have lost the art of preaching. Systematic Theology has taken over. I am not totally anti sermons…in fact far from it. The issue is that often sermons are so poorly done that the point of them gets lost amidst the snores!
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
11.12 am on 13 Oct 2009
Hi Anthony,
I don’t think it’s either/or it’s both and. The collapsing of church into online/social media, is disembodied and loss of public life and particularity. Just as locating church life as the sunday service is disconnected from the other spheres of life.
And how social media is captive the logic of the market should concern us.
Christian identity that is missional to all locations but rooted in the particular to a life lived accountable with others in community, is I warrant distinctly christian.
Jase
Reply to this comment
Comment by Anthony Johnson
12.30 pm on 13 Oct 2009
Fair comments. I feel that it should be a part of your Christian experience/community. (and in this I include blogs like this and online lectios like the one Dream set up.) All of these things if used sensibly expose us to a wider range of Christians and this can only be good…..so long as it is responsible and thoughtful. We still need to be an active part of a community of real people as well though if it is to work.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
1.12 pm on 13 Oct 2009
And there we are on the same page
Reply to this comment
Comment by Anthony Johnson
4.39 pm on 13 Oct 2009
….but does that community of people need to be a specific church or from a range of churches?
That is the question I am exploring now. Surely all Christians are part of the same church. I do wonder then if the issue becomes one of accountability.
Comments won’t nest below this level.
Comment by Jason Clark
5.57 pm on 13 Oct 2009
I think there is something vital that is lost when church is collapsed into the virtual, and there is no local and particular.
Accountability is lost, social justice that takes place where we live is nearly impossible, and there is something about how community life with others forms our identity for public and virtual life.
To give ourselves over to online, post church ecclesiology seems to deliver us to the logic of the market in isolated monads, consuming resources and unable to take any action with others.
Again that doesn’t mean all collapses into the local community.
Reply here
Comment by James Prescott
6.20 pm on 12 Oct 2009
Jase,
Do you ever think that maybe, in God’s original economy, that we all meant to ‘consume’ to a certain degree, and its merely we have distorted what God’s ‘consumerism’ was meant to be? If no sin had entered the world, then people may still have had different gifts, and skills which complimented each other, and the idea is that we all fairly traded skills and resources with each other, without the need for money. And when we did consume things it would be fair amounts and God’s quality products? After all He did make the earth with the ability to make more of itself in Genesis 1, and it does make you wonder what God’s original plan was.
Say now, every resource was distributed, traded and worked on fairly and justly and equally, there would ultimately be no need for money. The more wealthy nations gave away what they had in excess freely and we ended up having the same resources (including education and technological), then we would still consume food and possibly other things. People would still after all want to read books, listen to music and communicate with each other, so we would need those resources managed and organised somehow.
Is it making a god and a culture out of consumerism the problem, rather than actually the original idea behind consuming and sharing produce, skills and resources?
As for the sermon stuff, I do think we need more creativity in sermons – though the ones at our church are very good, and there is a place for theology – but I think there is more to sermons than we see in the majority of churches and maybe even as is taught in seminary – after all, we all know how amazing a preacher Rob Bell is, but he said in an interview with him I read that he got poor grades in preaching class – because he didn’t fit the prescribed format.
I think there is more to come with the development and evolution of the sermon.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
11.09 am on 13 Oct 2009
Hi James,
I’m certainly not anti-consumer, that it is inherently evil/wrong. In fact I’ll be suggesting in my thesis that learning the ‘desire rightly’ a la Augustine, that christian formation is about training our engagements in the world, to love the world rightly. The problem is that we do so little and so shallowly with what we have around self creation, rather than christian identity formation. Then we perpetuate that by the ways we consume christian resources in isolation from each other, that are more about consumerism than the deeper possibilities available.
Jase
Reply to this comment