" The question is whether our churches are part of the problem or part of the solution. When evangelism is discussed in books or at conferences there seems to be a growing appreciation that some version of church is vital for outreach in contemporary culture...The irony is that the search for the relevant church illustrates the extent to which church is still part of the problem."
- Liquid Church p.13
I'm really amazed at how there seems to be two camps in the Reformed world:
1.
Those who think the Gospel is inherently culturally applicable, that we need to try to reach out to contemporary culture doing all number of odd ministries etc., and that the church should just be the church, like its been for 2 thousand years.
2. Those who think the Gospel is relevant, but has to be spoken anew to each generation with it's particular needs, sins, struggles, etc. etc. etc.
What's really really great, is that group 1 so consistently misses that these are two fundamental assumptions about the faith, and that it's kinda silly to argue from 1 that 2 is wrong.
What's even better, is that Pete Ward's assertion that the search for the relevant Church is inherent to "why" the church is irrelevant, is actually self-defeating. He's writing a book on why the church isn't relevant, in hopes that he might encourage it to BE relevant (by stopping trying to be relevant, I would assume), at which point he's doing the very thing that he accuses the "relevant churchers" of doing: trying to nail down the "relevant" church.
Posted by: JosiahQ at August 15, 2003 10:15 AMI think that Pete is talking about a relevant "form" of church - the book as far a what I have read - is not at all about "forms" or praxis at all. It is theology and the idea that what is truly going to change the church is conversations and relationships - not the right form. But I don't know - I am only on Chap 2.
Have you read it Josiah? It is not a real new book (2002)- but it is to me.