Just one question: what does lectio divina have to do with all this TM stuff you guys are worrying about? Lectio divina is no more like TM than the NPH Sunday School quarterly is.
Just one question: what does lectio divina have to do with all this TM stuff you guys are worrying about? Lectio divina is no more like TM than the NPH Sunday School quarterly is.
Last edited by Randy McRoberts; 20th January 2009 at 03:57 PM (15:57). Reason: left out a word because I edited to be kinder
Apply yourself wholly to the text; apply the text wholly to yourself. - Johann Albrecht Bengel
George, some of us (at least, one of us) stopped participating much in the theology forum because it isn't much about theology most of the time. It's more about people worrying about people doing things and having ideas that others aren't comfortable with. The current meditative practices rant is one example.
The things that people here seem to want to discuss under the heading of theology are pretty much boring to me. And I'm sick and tired of people who think they get to decide who is in and who is out, who is a real Christian and who is a pretender.
Sick to death of it. If you are underrepresented, that ought to tell you something.
Apply yourself wholly to the text; apply the text wholly to yourself. - Johann Albrecht Bengel
Dennis,
I personally wouldn't classify church services, or Sunday School as "generalities" but to answer you question we have youth meetings which to my understanding are a bit of a hybrid: Social-Devotional-Discipleship.
For adults the church I currently attend offers nothing approaching a "Wesley's Class Meetings (or its modern form in Covenant Discipleship Groups) or Phoebe Palmer's Tuesday Meeting."
My previous three Churches had Discipleship meetings/groups.
Now that you have me thinking about it, it seems that the smaller and more rural churches I have attended usually don't have these opportunities. The larger and more urban church were I have attend usually do.
Hope this answer your question effectively.
Reformed George
PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS NAZNETTER RARELY IF EVER HOLDS THE "MAJORITY VIEW"
"There's a ball at the castle
And I've been invited
And I need to practice my dancing
Oh, please, Daddy, please?"
So I will dance with Cinderella...
Maybe the whole CP thing is more appealing for those who are in a bigger rat race than those who live in quiet rural settings.
Yeah, if you work on a farm you get lots of alone time with God. When I roofed I got lots of alone time when I started doing only repairs. Sitting on the housetop by yourself listening to the wind and the pounding of your hammer, we didn't have mp3 players back then.
Some humor.....a pic I took the other day.
George, I can answer from one side of your question -- I tend to have a strong "dislike" for the emergent movement. I have attempted to read McLaren and made it about 2/3 of the way through one of his books before I misplaced it (I quit actively reading it and don't remember where I left it or if I may have thrown it away). All of that being said, I would be open to some of the CS, CP-SF, and have even participated in a derivative of it. As with many other practices (except communion and baptism) I don't think they are warranted/necessary but may be beneficial within the right context. I have also sat in many church services where the music/prayer/sermons were not especially helpful.
I would agree with some of your statements regarding McLaren/emergent recognition among some large portions of the denomination (although I think it would be true in many other denominations). Then again Ravi Zacharias is not that well known in many churches. Even within the Nazarene denomination, I wonder how many would recognize the name Mildred Bangs Wynkoop or H. Ray Dunning?
I would even agree with your analysis of Naznet participation as a broad generalization. That is why I count my time here as "missional".![]()
Thanks for taking the time to respond. I did not mean to suggest that church services or Sunday School were "generalities" in any negative sense, only to suggest that they are more "general" means of spiritual development as opposed to those activities that are specifically focused on spiritual growth. Certainly one would hope that church services would contribute to that. Yet it is all too easy to attend church, or even to lead church services, without specifically focusing on spiritual development that engages where a person actually is in their journey.
It would be interesting to reflect on or speculate about why smaller or rural churches have less opportunities for congregational spiritual development than larger or urban churches do. But I fear that would lead us in another direction.
As I said, I don't really want to debate this, so FWIW. I do know the heart of several pastors who are pursuing contemplative spirituality, meditative prayer, and lectio divina as vehicles for spiritual formation within their congregations (one of those is my own pastor who also happens to be my wife). The goal is nothing other than to facilitate people drawing closer to God and to grow in their own faith commitment. These are all tools, something specific and concrete on the ground, to enable people to bring their spiritual journey out into the open and consciously work on it. Or, in Wesley's phraseology, "earnestly seeking" to grow spiritually.
In that sense, these approaches serve the same purpose as the Class Meetings, or the Tuesday Meeting, or Covenant Groups, or various forms of "Practicing the Presence of God." For example, "Heart Paths" is a very disciplined form of Contemplative Spirituality that is usually under the leadership of a "Spiritual Director." It is based on a 400-year-old approach to spirituality that focuses on spiritual disciplines that include reading, prayer, and spiritual exercises. Its purpose is to become more in tune with God and his grace and providence at work in our lives.
Can such approaches be misused? Of Course! Just like preaching, church services, prayer, or any other form of spiritual expression can be perverted by those who either do not understand it, do not reflect on what they are doing in relation to the Faith, or do not care. But that does not mean there is no value in them, nor does it mean that all who practice them are infidels who are corrupting the Faith (not that you have suggested that!). To assume that as a generality would be its own form of perverting the Faith, as well as "spreading surmises injurious to the good names of others."
And it seems to me that such approaches are far better than doing nothing and just expecting people to mature spiritually on their own without nurture and discipline. It doesn't work for physical growth, so why would we expect it to work for spiritual growth? It seems to me that it is part of "making disciples."
I think a lot of our difficulty at this point is that we don't like the idea of spiritual discipline, or having to "earnestly seek." We'd rather get it all in a moment without having to do much at all. And yet, if Christianity is about a relationship with God and others, we probably need to realize that all relationships need to be nurtured or they will wither and die.
FWIW.
Grace and Peace,
Dennis B.
Are speaking of yourself or me? Check the stats Brother, until December 19th, 2008 I hadn't posted in the Theology Forum since January of 08. In fact in 11+ months, in all of Naznet, I think I only posted 2, possibly 3 times to Marsh Lynns' Word-Action SS Curriculum thread. I might have also posted in the thread...the title escapes me, but I think it was initiated by Dave Pettigew and it had to deal with congregants making nasty comments about his daughter singing in church. I can't remember for sure if I posted, but I do vividly remember praying about that situation. That's it in 11+ months.
Who is ranting? If you look carefully you'll notice I didn't even start this post. I made one loose comment, Rich asked me a direct question about it. I provided him a direct answer. He felt it merited an additional post. Who is ranting?
Are you referring to my post about the Tweetle Beatle Battles?![]()
Please Brother, site some recent examples of where I have done this? I am almost maniacal in my use of qualifying phases like IMO "in my opinion," I think" "I believe" etc.
To all: If in any recent posts I have lead anyone to believe that I have been questioning their Christianity or calling them Pretenders please let me know and forgive me!
Yeah, it tells me that I think, you are dealing with something else similar and your stress is bleeding through. And, IMO you need some couch time. Whether that means professional couch time or just a long nap.... I don't know?
Try Fox in Socks, two-times through that usually helps my daughter relax.
In the words of Faith Hill, man ..."Just Breathe..."
I am praying that you get some stress relief
I think that is the first time on Naznet I've been told to: Take a Hike!
...In an Entirely Sanctified way of course.....![]()
Reformed George
PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS NAZNETTER RARELY IF EVER HOLDS THE "MAJORITY VIEW"
"There's a ball at the castle
And I've been invited
And I need to practice my dancing
Oh, please, Daddy, please?"
So I will dance with Cinderella...
Reformed George
PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS NAZNETTER RARELY IF EVER HOLDS THE "MAJORITY VIEW"
"There's a ball at the castle
And I've been invited
And I need to practice my dancing
Oh, please, Daddy, please?"
So I will dance with Cinderella...
If it will help you can take my contributions out of your calculations. I am not a Nazarene.
For the record, I have noticed an increase in the number of people who are more open to open theism. I began that journey more than ten years ago and I think, at that time, I was definitely more in the minority here.
George, NazNet is NOT a true representation of Nazarene thinking. It's more like a place where people who feel alone in their churches can come out and find that they aren't lone rangers after all. But Joe and Nancy Nazarene certainly aren't into the Emerging church or Open Theism.
Last edited by Hans Deventer; 21st January 2009 at 10:13 AM (10:13).
Hans
God is love. This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. (1 John 4:8b-9)